Official Countdown to Firing"NoLowPostOffense"Grunfeld

[WizarDynasty]

you guys still don't get it. Gilbert Arenas is a shooting guard on defense. He guards s/g's better than he does point guards. That's is why gil is way way closer to sg than he is the pg. Salmons is just as bad guarding point guards as gil. Tony and Billups guard point guards way better than guarding s/g's which is why they are alot closer to pg's than they are s/gs. Hopefully this clears things up.

[DCZards]

I agree with Dat2U. Arenas doesn't need to be a pure PG and he doesn't need to move to SG. I see no reason why he can't be the equivalent of Tony Parker or Chauncey Billups on offense. Those guys score a ton but rack up just 6-7 assists per 36 minutes, yet their teams are among the best in the league.

I agree that Arenas can play PG but I see him at PG about 50% of the time and the other 50% at the SG. In fact, some of the Zards best moments offensively were when GA was at SG and AD played PG, which is how the Zards closed out most games when both GA and AD were healthy.

With the addition of Crittenton, the Zards have a true (and developing) PG to team with GA. I don't see GA being either a Parker or Billups because, despite their ability to score, both Parker and Billups approach the game as passing, run-the-team PGs first and scoring PGs second. That's just not GA's mentality...nor should it be.

[nate33]

you guys still don't get it. Gilbert Arenas is a shooting guard on defense. He guards s/g's better than he does point guards. That's is why gil is way way closer to sg than he is the pg. Salmons is just as bad guarding point guards as gil. Tony and Billups guard point guards way better than guarding s/g's which is why they are alot closer to pg's than they are s/gs. Hopefully this clears things up.

Typical WizarDynasty post. States an unsubatantiated opinion as if it's an incontrovertable fact. And then goes on to make the rest of his argument based on a false premise while implying that anybody who disagrees is an idiot.

What evidence do you have that suggests Arenas is better at guarding shooting guards than PG's?

In general, I have found that Arenas has always been a decent on-the-ball defender (when he wants to be), he's just terrible away from the ball because he watches the ball and not his man. It seems to me that he's better off guarding the PG who actually has the ball in his hands most of the time, rather than being told to chase a SG around a bunch of picks (when we all know Arenas would rather cheat off his man to get a steal).

[nate33]

With the addition of Crittenton, the Zards have a true (and developing) PG to team with GA. I don't see GA being either a Parker or Billups because, despite their ability to score, both Parker and Billups approach the game as passing, run-the-team PGs first and scoring PGs second. That's just not GA's mentality...nor should it be.

Parker definitely does not have a pass-first approach. He is looking to score. Billups used to be a score first PG but has gradually, over many years, transitioned his game to a pass-first approach. I believe Arenas will make the same gradual transition.

[pancakes3]

why can't gil play as the primary ball handler? what pressures or inadequacies does Gil have to overcome? why can't gil be the one with ball in hand, getting into the lane, and then creating open shots for his teammates? Why does LH have to do that when Gil does it at least twice as good?

what separates gilbert getting into the lane and finishing and nash getting into the lane and turning 180 degrees to kick it out to Barbosa? Gil is able to finish. If Nash could finish as well as Gil, you can bet that he'd take the shot. If gil finds that the shot is too tough for even him to convert and kicks out out for DS to clang off the iron, did gil magically become infused with "true point guard skills" or is he simply analyzing the situation and trying to score the ball in a manner as efficient as possible?

Could Gil cut down on turnovers by not driving so much? yes. Could gil rack up more assists by dishing more off the drive rather than taking the shot? yes. But then you'd be paying 111 million dollars for a guy to not draw double teams, not draw 5 fouls a night, not create open shots for his teammates, and not maximize his talent. you'd end up with a 111 million dollar pissed off superstar that he's been reduced to the role of Roger Mason Jr while he watches Mike James clumsily barrel into the lane to botch another layup. He's probably have a solid 3 point % though.

We've got Michael Vick on our team, and some of you want him to play like Dan Marino and go looking for a RB to keep the defense honest. We've got 1 guy that can function as both - an optimal wildcat that keeps the linebackers in and the safeties deep, opening up the middle. (surprisingly apt analogy in the sense that the on-ball defender has to play off the ball to compensate for the quickness off the dribble, and the help defense has to stay home to not give up the open jumper). The guy can run and does his best when running, and wins games when running. If you all don't want a guy that can do that based on an arbitrary definition of a basketball position then i think you guys are thinking in a box within a box.

[WizarDynasty]

First of remember gil is close 215lbs. His has to exert more force to move his body to keep up with a pg who normally weight less than 200lbs. Gil doesn't have to worry about these dynamics on offense because a weaker point guard is usually guarding him and he can over power.
Tony parker is closer to a pg on defense..closer to a sg on offense. gil is closer to sg on offense and on defense.
There are few players who are 210 plus range like jason kidd than have exceptional lateral quickness making them freaks of nature on defense..a lighter player usually can change directions alot easier than a heavy player. Gil is not a freak of nature on defense like jason kidd or Dwade..with exceptional agility scores from draftexpress but does well guarding s/g which is why Hughes and broken down AD normally guarded pgs whenever possible when the two were on the floor.

so offense gil is s/g except for the fact that he can get the ball past the half court mark. Gil is a great s/g on offense..he shoots the ball and really isn't looking to get his teammates going. That's the whole definition of a shooting guard...they shoot the ball and good at it. A point guard defends against the fast break because they are the quickest..and don't give up easy fast break points. On offense they develop their bigmen because bigmen don't have ball handling skills out on the perimeter and rely on the point guard to get them ball.
It's a mistake to call gil a point guard because his first instinct is to score and not get his team mates into a groove but that's why he is a "shooting guard". There is no need to change gil's instinct but its incorrect to try and force him into a player that sets up his bigmen for easy shots and offensive advantages consistently. I think we should let gil play to his strength but always remember that the bigs need a player to set them up in the paint since they can't handle the ball and we need to remember this isn't gil's instinct. He was never that way in college, and he hasn't been that way in the pro's. Gil is best when he is shooting and creating fouls which is the definition of a s/g. The reason why he has played p/g for the wiz is because no one else on the roster was even adequate at playing p/g with Crit. that problem is solved.
The issue now is that we don't have a true s/f that can guard both the s/g and p/f's adequately on defense. Offensively caron has decent jumper while nick's is shaky. Nick is a true s/g since he can guard s/gs and s/f..while caron is a pretend s/f that should really be a s/g. The reason caron is a pretend s/f is because he can't guard p/f's in the post which means the positions that he should be able to guard are p/g s/g and s/f due to his physical dimension at being only 6'5. CAron basically has the same defensive range that nick young has which should open up your eyes that caron is suppose to be a s/g.

I think we run into same issues with Gil. He is best at guarding s/g but struggles mightly guarding s/f's.
So gil is not a true s/g just like caron is not a true s/f. Gil's lacks the the upper defensive range for a s/g..just as caron lacks the upper defensive range for a s/f.
this issue is that with nick starting we have two s/g's on offense and neither of these players has the flexibility to guard p/fs. Arenas will always push nick to a s/f on offense and I don't think nick..just like caron can defend adequately against a post player and nick is better shooting the ball as opposed to setting up his bigmen for easy shots. Also caron and Nick don't have the post skills on offense and defense..which is another hint that both are s/g's by nature.

[pancakes3]

WizD: Gil can't guard point guards.

well i guess we've run the gamut from CB can't guard SF, to AJ can't guard PF, that it's now Gil's turn to be flamed for his lack of two-way-ness.

the conversation will go from

1 - Gil is too slow/un-agile to guard point guards.
2 - Gil is not a two-way player.
3 - Gil is overrated and we should go for a elite two-way player like Hinrich who mathematically inexplicably consistently performs above his average and never gives up below opponents' average and we'll never win a championship without an elite two-way player as our franchise player.
4 - Somebody replies to WizD's post about net impact on the game, and how Gil's superb offense more than offsets whatever he gives up on defense in terms of on/off or net PER.
5 - WizD pulls up some singular case like when Boobie Gibson or Delonte West went for 5 points more than his average against Gil so Gil must be a terrible defender at either guard positions and then accuses the board in general as backwards thinkers and how we need to embrace the philosophy of the two-way play if we want to become truly enlightened basketball aficionados.
6 - rehashed retort about net production
7 - no reply and we broach the next topic, probably about some other biometric shortcoming of our players like how McGee has weak knees, CB's lateral slowness, or AJ's stubby arms.

thanks. seen it. don't want to see it again. next story please.

[DCZards]

Parker definitely does not have a pass-first approach. He is looking to score. Billups used to be a score first PG but has gradually, over many years, transitioned his game to a pass-first approach. I believe Arenas will make the same gradual transition.

I'll agree with you on Parker. But Billups, as good as he is offensively, never had the scoring ability that GA has, which made it easier (and more appropriate) for Billups to make the gradual transition you're talking about. Plus, it helped that Billups made that transition while playing alongside one of the best shooters in the game--Rip Hamilton. There's no one on this current Wizards roster (other than Arenas) who comes close to matching Rip's ability to shoot the rock.

[crackhed]

Typical WizarDynasty post. States an unsubatantiated opinion as if it's an incontrovertable fact. And then goes on to make the rest of his argument based on a false premise while implying that anybody who disagrees is an idiot.

What evidence do you have that suggests Arenas is better at guarding shooting guards than PG's?

In general, I have found that Arenas has always been a decent on-the-ball defender (when he wants to be), he's just terrible away from the ball because he watches the ball and not his man. It seems to me that he's better off guarding the PG who actually has the ball in his hands most of the time, rather than being told to chase a SG around a bunch of picks (when we all know Arenas would rather cheat off his man to get a steal).

ur observation's on point. seems like every time his offensive player gives up the ball he just stands there and drifts into the lane without purpose. what i cant figure out is why it is that fans can see this stuff and the coaches cant?

[LyricalRico]

Parker definitely does not have a pass-first approach. He is looking to score. Billups used to be a score first PG but has gradually, over many years, transitioned his game to a pass-first approach. I believe Arenas will make the same gradual transition.

I'll agree with you on Parker. But Billups, as good as he is offensively, never had the scoring ability that GA has, which made it easier (and more appropriate) for Billups to make the gradual transition you're talking about. Plus, it helped that Billups made that transition while playing alongside one of the best shooters in the game--Rip Hamilton. There's no one on this current Wizards roster (other than Arenas) who comes close to matching Rip's ability to shoot the rock.

Don't forget coaching. Gil has never been coached to be a pass-first PG or any kind of a defender. I bet he hasn't had to play defense since his last practice with Lute Olsen. And since he's already gotten his $111M payday playing only one side of the ball, I don't see any reason why he would change now.

I think that whoever becomes Gil's longterm backcourt buddy needs to be able to guard both backcourt positions. That way we can put Gil on the weakest guard in the other team's lineup. We'll always have to hide him defensively IMO, which is much easier than hiding a "big man" like Jamison.

[WizarDynasty]

WizD: Gil can't guard point guards.

well i guess we've run the gamut from CB can't guard SF, to AJ can't guard PF, that it's now Gil's turn to be flamed for his lack of two-way-ness.

the conversation will go from

1 - Gil is too slow/un-agile to guard point guards.
2 - Gil is not a two-way player.
3 - Gil is overrated and we should go for a elite two-way player like Hinrich who mathematically inexplicably consistently performs above his average and never gives up below opponents' average and we'll never win a championship without an elite two-way player as our franchise player.
4 - Somebody replies to WizD's post about net impact on the game, and how Gil's superb offense more than offsets whatever he gives up on defense in terms of on/off or net PER.
5 - WizD pulls up some singular case like when Boobie Gibson or Delonte West went for 5 points more than his average against Gil so Gil must be a terrible defender at either guard positions and then accuses the board in general as backwards thinkers and how we need to embrace the philosophy of the two-way play if we want to become truly enlightened basketball aficionados.
6 - rehashed retort about net production
7 - no reply and we broach the next topic, probably about some other biometric shortcoming of our players like how McGee has weak knees, CB's lateral slowness, or AJ's stubby arms.

thanks. seen it. don't want to see it again. next story please.

gil has shown that he can be a two way player at the s/g position. He is best shooting the ball on offense which makes him a shooting guard. On defense..i repeat he is Better at guarding s/g's than he is at guarding pg's which is why he is closer to a s/g on defense than a point guard. "gilbert can't guard pg's"...where do you guys come from?

[Kanyewest]

Don't forget coaching. Gil has never been coached to be a pass-first PG or any kind of a defender. I bet he hasn't had to play defense since his last practice with Lute Olsen. And since he's already gotten his $111M payday playing only one side of the ball, I don't see any reason why he would change now.

I think that whoever becomes Gil's longterm backcourt buddy needs to be able to guard both backcourt positions. That way we can put Gil on the weakest guard in the other team's lineup. We'll always have to hide him defensively IMO, which is much easier than hiding a "big man" like Jamison.

In Golden State, Arenas was asked to be the point guard of the team. In fact, coaches and teammates were upset by Arenas' first shoot mentality. Arenas in protest didn't shoot the ball for two games in a row until the last 4 to 5 minutes of a game. I'm sure Arenas was asked to step up defensively in Golden State with backcourt mates like Jason Richardson and Earl Boykins.

I bet Arenas has been asked to step up his defensively even under Eddie Jordan. Even guys like Larry Hughes, Jared Jeffries, Stevenson, and Mason have played at least above average defense. When Arenas went to tryout for the Olympic team, Coach K had the opportunity to teach him some defense for a month and he didn't improve.

I think it's redundant to say that the Wizards need someone that knows how to play defense. Maybe defense is sometime you just have inside like any other basketball skill (shooting, first step to the basket, rebounding). Arenas had all the physical tools to guard point guards but just bad mental habits. Granted because of Arenas's energy, it will take a huge amount of effort for him to become the offensive player he was in the 1st place. I agree that the Wizards next coach should be a great teacher of defense like Mike Brown. But maybe Arenas is a lost cause on defense like some other players like Steve Nash.

[barelyawake]

For what it's worth, Gil likes defending SGs better than PGs. When Hughes was here, Hughes would usually go on points (because that was Gil's preference). I hate to flog a dead horse (God save the Queen), but with a guy like Stephen Jackson in a three guard rotation with Gil and Crit (all getting starter mins), you'd solve many of these problems. And now, Young becomes your instant o spark for which you've been searching. You'd solve the distribution problem and you'd solve the defensive problem. And I don't care who of those three you call the point guard at any one time. I'd go even further and trade Young, and get another guy who is a 6-4 PG with good court vision; is a trey specialist; and is a lock down defender of PGs and SGs (like a young AD/Raja Bell). WizD is right about one thing, we should be looking mostly at glue guys (guys who can flip positions -- Stephen Jackson or Diaw types). We've needed two things FOREVER -- a glue guy and a tough defensive, vet big (one with a lil clout and leadership skills).

FYI, Crit has always been scouted to be a starter. I think we think of him as a bench player because he is a late bloomer (having been stuck on benches). But, scouts always listed him as a future starter. I think it's taking time to sink in what a steal Crit was.

[nate33]

For what it's worth, Gil likes defending SGs better than PGs. When Hughes was here, Hughes would usually go on points (because that was Gil's preference).

I remember things differently. I remember Severn Hoos screaming from the mountaintops that Hughes should be guarding PG's because he was much better at it, but I don't recall the Wizards actually letting him do it very often.

[barelyawake]

For what it's worth, Gil likes defending SGs better than PGs. When Hughes was here, Hughes would usually go on points (because that was Gil's preference).

I remember things differently. I remember Severn Hoos screaming from the mountaintops that Hughes should be guarding PG's because he was much better at it, but I don't recall the Wizards actually letting him do it very often.

Hmmm that might have been early on, because at some point, they came to an agreement about that (based on Gil liking to guard SGs better). I'm not saying he can't guard PGs. Just saying he likes guarding SGs better. And I wonder if, in a sense, that's out of laziness (on the defensive end).

[DCZards]

Don't forget coaching. Gil has never been coached to be a pass-first PG or any kind of a defender. I bet he hasn't had to play defense since his last practice with Lute Olsen. And since he's already gotten his $111M payday playing only one side of the ball, I don't see any reason why he would change now.

I too want GA to get more assists but it would be a mistake to try to "coach" GA into being a pass-first PG. It would take away from what he does best--score. You don't want GA conflicted between whether he should pass or shoot, because then he'll be "thinking" the game rather than "playing" the game...and you don't want that. GA's never going to be a CP3 or Deron Williams...or a Jason Kidd on D.

[dobrojim]

repeating myself but I like BA's point about Critt being a future starter.

I think with continued positive development (by Critt), a starting backcourt
of him and Gil could be pretty good (or better). Critt with experience could
be a smarter version of Hughes who was gifted and made great plays for us,
but would leave you banging your head at too many other times. And is now
paid like he only makes good plays.

And I like the idea of Critt with a guy like Steph Curry too.

Critt should be starting now. That's probably my biggest current gripe with Tapps.

[LyricalRico]

^ The only reservation I'd have is that Critt cannot shoot at all. Hughes was no Ray Allen but he was decent and could get hot every now and then from three. Critt is just abysmal from any distance. That means that he's going to have to contribute by getting assists and driving the lane - things that require him having the ball in his hands. He won't be able to do much off the ball even as a decoy. If we agree that Gill needs the ball in his hands to be effective, I'm not sure he and Critt would be a good combo.

[WizarDynasty]

i think you are forgetting that Crit broke the state scoring record. Him and Arenas are going to be far more deadly than the hughes and arenas backcourt of the old days. Crit does every better than hughes except for hughes "famous moving floating jumper". Everything else Crit has him beat. Hughes was always a low percentage volume shooter that killed normally drop your shooting percentage into the 30 Percentage range which usually means a loss and Crit is even more explosive on fast break handling the ball than even arenas. If we get a small forward that can play above the rim..and can create for other..(caron and jamison can't play above the rim and neither can guard 3 positions) like an aminu...but also can guard s/g and p/f...much of our defensive worries will be over. Crit has decent form on his shot and i predict he will be a better shooter than Hughes.

[hands11]

Parker definitely does not have a pass-first approach. He is looking to score. Billups used to be a score first PG but has gradually, over many years, transitioned his game to a pass-first approach. I believe Arenas will make the same gradual transition.

I'll agree with you on Parker. But Billups, as good as he is offensively, never had the scoring ability that GA has, which made it easier (and more appropriate) for Billups to make the gradual transition you're talking about. Plus, it helped that Billups made that transition while playing alongside one of the best shooters in the game--Rip Hamilton. There's no one on this current Wizards roster (other than Arenas) who comes close to matching Rip's ability to shoot the rock.

Exactly. I really don't know why people get so upset about moving GA to SG. It's who he is. It's what he does. Why not let him do it. He can play PG more when he get older. As for those who don't think it matters. It's like I've been saying, we need to sum of the part to be greater then the whole.

Someone said we weren't any better with GA out last year so we were not a better team without him. Yeah, but think about what they are saying. We were not a worse team without him either. Actually we were a more balanced team that was missing what we actually had on the team but didn't use enough ( RM) But even then, we would have been better with just adding part of what GA can do in total. We needed his driving and 3 ball shooting. But we didn't need him to dominate to the ball.

Haywood was a lot more involved with GA out. I for one give a ton of value to getting your center involved scoring easy dunk and getting fouled. I would much rather a 260 pound player get fouled at the rack then a 215 lb one getting smacked by the 260 lb player.

Look, GA was mostly a one man band. We need a team of pieces. If we weren't any worse without him, then adding him back doesn't make us any better unless we find a more harmonious way to use his talents. Like with Boston, everyone with a capitol E should adjust their game for the greater whole of the team.

I am one that believes a team needs a court general this thinking about mismatches and how to best attack the opponents defense using all it's player. While GA can do this, his mindset is to do it all himself. He is a SG by his nature. Adding a PG like Crit of better will allow him to save himself some during the year and for stretches of the game and allow us to pound the ball with Haywood and let other player get involved. When it come crunch time, you can always go to GA and let him take over. Doesn't this sound more like what other really good teams do ?

I'm just not sure why people don't want to be more then we were. It's not like AJ can change what he does. He is a high volume scorer. You get him to ball, he scores. He has some dribbling to him moves but he is best when it's not to much. Get Haywood the ball in the post, he will either make a move or kick it out when doubled. That's what you want. That's what SA does. That starts the mismatches and rotation. CB can do a little of both. Some spot shooting. Some drives. Some passing. So let GA a SG. His approach would be more like AJs only with a little CB in him. All this can happen if you give a true PG the PG job. We would be a much more balance and complete team this way. Why anyone wouldn't want this is beyond me.

Specially now that GA has a bad wheel. Lets save him some wear and tear.

Also, I would like to remind people. Unlike some PGs, a good bit of GA assist and fast break lead passes. One in the half court, he wasn't that great a passing PG. That said, I have seen him do an amazing job at this. I can do it. He just doesn't that often because again, it's not who he is right now. Let him light it up when needed at SG for now. As he get older, matures, slows down some, then more him to PG where he can be a Billips.

If we want to be the best we can be. Better then we were before. Then we are going to need to do something different then we did before.