RealGM

Antinomy wrote:

spikeslovechild wrote:Combo guards are more guys who have the size where they should be playing PG but don't have the passing skills.

It's sort of an outdated term because very few teams run their offense completely through their PG anymore.

I would think that combo guards are guys that don’t have SG size but have to play there due to their lack of general PG skills.

Guys like:

Jason Terry
Lou Williams
Jerryd Bayless
Flip Murray
Donovan Mitchell
Nick Van Exel

There are also players like Jerry West who have started at both guard positions and played like money at each.

Feel_the_Heat15 wrote:

CoachD wrote:Jordan and Kobe were quintessential Shooting Guards. There was nothing combo guard about them.

Wade played more point, but really out of necessity, and the fact that he was seen a little small for the SG spot. In terms of play style, he was a pure SG

How was there nothing combo-guard about them when they were capable of playing PG as well as most full-time PGs?

Because I think you’re missing the definition that most people use for combo guards. It was in one of the first responses.

Feel_the_Heat15 wrote:They were all really good passers and I'm sure they'd be better PGs than 80% of the starting PGs in the NBA today if they were in their prime.

They would also be better small forwarders than 80% of the league, so?

CoachD wrote:Jordan and Kobe were quintessential Shooting Guards. There was nothing combo guard about them.

Wade played more point, but really out of necessity, and the fact that he was seen a little small for the SG spot. In terms of play style, he was a pure SG

Also and I think the thing a modern NBA fan doesnt get is that they take the shooting part too literally and the point part too literally as well. What I mean is they feel point guards should score points and shooting guards should be shooters. I guess that makes sense.

Back when Jordan and Kobe played, if accurate PGs shouldve been called passing guards and SGs shouldve been called scoring guards as those were the roles most assigned.

Feel_the_Heat15 wrote:They were all really good passers and I'm sure they'd be better PGs than 80% of the starting PGs in the NBA today if they were in their prime.

How dare you lump Kobe in with Wade and Jordan!

A SG does not get the honor of being considered a PG if their career assist average is in the 4s.

For MJ's sake, he averaged 8 assists per game for an entire season and through multiple playoff runs ('85, '89, '91).

MJ averaged 11.4 assists in the 1991 NBA finals, for crying out loud! So Kobe really needs to GTFO of this conversation.

Wade, Kobe, Jordan were definitely swingmen and if anything specific to an area of the court.. lead guards

Like others have said, and from what I've heard, read the most, combo guard is someone like Antonio Daniels, Jason Terry... too small to be an SG primarily every game, not skilled enough to be a PG primarily every game, but has the necessary adequacies to play either position.

Where the "combo" is relating to size, play style, and skillset.. plays like SG with primary scoring mind-set, but defensively could be any guard at PG or SG, or smaller SFs even (Daniels).

Guys like Kobe, Wade, Jordan are just "wings" to me, or swingmen.

people who want to nitpick positional designation are boring.

literally who cares. The positions aren't law, they're guidelines that were made up once upon a time to help explain what was going on on the court. We still use them but they aren't always helpful. Great players can be hard to define. Most of the best players these days can play multiple positions, so it's about what other limited players are put next to them. I'm sure Kawhi is perfectly capable at the 2-3-4, but what lesser players are next to him and what kind of roles should they have to help the team win. Giannis could be a 3-4-5, but he's best surrounded by shooters, and the Bucks got a shooting 5, so Giannis plays the 4.

If you want to call those guys combo guards, go for it. But like... who cares? Is it helpful to call Jordan a combo guard? tbh I think you chose bad examples because Jordan and Kobe were maniacal scorers who did their best when they were confined to a shooting guard role in an offense (the triangle to be specific). Jordan and especially Kobe, when running the offense, took too many tough shots and stalled the offense.. So Phil Jackson managed the offense through Scottie Pippen and Shaq/Pau Gasol, freeing his all-time scorers to do what they did best. Jordan was a pretty elite creator, but Kobe (although he had the passing ability) was a famously reluctant passer. D-Wade is a sort of good example. He definitely spent some time playing a point guard like role... but he was a sneaky awful dribbler. He commanded enough respect that guys let him dribble, but it seemed like when he'd get pressured he'd turn the ball over a LOT. Dribbled the ball off his foot more than he'd like to admit. At the end of the day, even though he played a lot of lead guard, Wade was more like a small forward in the way he dominated post matchups and used his physicality, length, athleticism and strength to dominate.

imho combo guard is a backhanded compliment. They are point guard sized players who you don't love to have running your offense because they more so look for their own shot and usually can't guard anyone.

The real question is why does it matter?

[Narrator: it doesn't.]

jamaalstar21 wrote:people who want to nitpick positional designation are boring.

literally who cares. The positions aren't law, they're guidelines that were made up once upon a time to help explain what was going on on the court. We still use them but they aren't always helpful. Great players can be hard to define. Most of the best players these days can play multiple positions, so it's about what other limited players are put next to them. I'm sure Kawhi is perfectly capable at the 2-3-4, but what lesser players are next to him and what kind of roles should they have to help the team win. Giannis could be a 3-4-5, but he's best surrounded by shooters, and the Bucks got a shooting 5, so Giannis plays the 4.

If you want to call those guys combo guards, go for it. But like... who cares? Is it helpful to call Jordan a combo guard? tbh I think you chose bad examples because Jordan and Kobe were maniacal scorers who did their best when they were confined to a shooting guard role in an offense (the triangle to be specific). Jordan and especially Kobe, when running the offense, took too many tough shots and stalled the offense.. So Phil Jackson managed the offense through Scottie Pippen and Shaq/Pau Gasol, freeing his all-time scorers to do what they did best. Jordan was a pretty elite creator, but Kobe (although he had the passing ability) was a famously reluctant passer. D-Wade is a sort of good example. He definitely spent some time playing a point guard like role... but he was a sneaky awful dribbler. He commanded enough respect that guys let him dribble, but it seemed like when he'd get pressured he'd turn the ball over a LOT. Dribbled the ball off his foot more than he'd like to admit. At the end of the day, even though he played a lot of lead guard, Wade was more like a small forward in the way he dominated post matchups and used his physicality, length, athleticism and strength to dominate.

imho combo guard is a backhanded compliment. They are point guard sized players who you don't love to have running your offense because they more so look for their own shot and usually can't guard anyone.

That's a huge over simplification

Players are defined at position by their strongest skill sets and who they are able to defend.

Kashi is nowhere near as effective guarding post up bigs as he is perimeter players.

Positions weren't made to just explain what was happening....

They were designed to provide an order a methodology

All around guards (Jordan/Kobe)
Shooting guards (Miller/Klay)
Combo guards (Smart/McMillan)
SG in PG body (Terry, Abdul Rauf, Iverson)
PG with good playmaking skills and elitte scoring (Curry/West)

Combo guard is guy who is avg at scoring and playmaking, can play PG/SG on def and off.

David Wesley.

LKN wrote:

CoachD wrote:

LKN wrote:
This is not true at all.... Reggie Miller and Ray Allen are much better examples of quintessential shooting guards. Kobe and MJ ran the offense quite a bit. MJ was the primary playmaker on the Bulls through the first threepeat (particularly in the playoffs).

A prototypical shooting guard is SUPPOSED to be able to run plays and handle the offense a little bit. Just as a prototypical SF should. These shooting guards who essentially just shoot, were considered specialists in the old days

Yeah maybe it's a terminology thing... to me Reggie Miller comes to mind when I think of the prototypical shooting guard.

MJ and Kobe could easily play the 1, 2 or 3.... they are basically swing men and part of the position-less basket trend that's been accelerating for the past 20-30 years.

I'd say Wade could easily play SF if he had to himself. He's one of the strongest SG's ever (much stronger than Kobe and pre comeback Jordan) with a huge 6'10" wingspan. He could easily slide over to sf.

Cause that would imply Kobe wanted to pass the ball half the time (especially if his teammates started sucking, then you'd see real hero ball kobe, to varying results).

Feel_the_Heat15 wrote:

picc wrote:The term we usually use is lead guard.

Can you have 2 lead-guards in a lineup?

Danny Ainge and Dennis Johnson was an example of this. Both were fairly interchangeable when they started for the Celtics and it was hard to say if one was the point and one was the two guard. Though Dennis Johnson was the better defender they were interchangeable on defense as well.

Soulcatcher33 wrote:

LKN wrote:

CoachD wrote:
A prototypical shooting guard is SUPPOSED to be able to run plays and handle the offense a little bit. Just as a prototypical SF should. These shooting guards who essentially just shoot, were considered specialists in the old days

Yeah maybe it's a terminology thing... to me Reggie Miller comes to mind when I think of the prototypical shooting guard.

MJ and Kobe could easily play the 1, 2 or 3.... they are basically swing men and part of the position-less basket trend that's been accelerating for the past 20-30 years.

I'd say Wade could easily play SF if he had to himself. He's one of the strongest SG's ever (much stronger than Kobe and pre comeback Jordan) with a huge 6'10" wingspan. He could easily slide over to sf.

Yeah he was definitely not small for SG. 6'5" in shoes (listing is wrong), 220 pounds, and that wingspan.

sixerswillrule wrote:

Soulcatcher33 wrote:

LKN wrote:
Yeah maybe it's a terminology thing... to me Reggie Miller comes to mind when I think of the prototypical shooting guard.

MJ and Kobe could easily play the 1, 2 or 3.... they are basically swing men and part of the position-less basket trend that's been accelerating for the past 20-30 years.

I'd say Wade could easily play SF if he had to himself. He's one of the strongest SG's ever (much stronger than Kobe and pre comeback Jordan) with a huge 6'10" wingspan. He could easily slide over to sf.

Yeah he was definitely not small for SG. 6'5" in shoes (listing is wrong), 220 pounds, and that wingspan.

Agree with you guys - I should have also mentioned Wade

CoachD wrote:Jordan and Kobe were quintessential Shooting Guards. There was nothing combo guard about them.

Wade played more point, but really out of necessity, and the fact that he was seen a little small for the SG spot. In terms of play style, he was a pure SG

Wade's virtually identical in size to Tyreke Evans.

CoachD wrote:

jamaalstar21 wrote:people who want to nitpick positional designation are boring.

literally who cares. The positions aren't law, they're guidelines that were made up once upon a time to help explain what was going on on the court. We still use them but they aren't always helpful. Great players can be hard to define. Most of the best players these days can play multiple positions, so it's about what other limited players are put next to them. I'm sure Kawhi is perfectly capable at the 2-3-4, but what lesser players are next to him and what kind of roles should they have to help the team win. Giannis could be a 3-4-5, but he's best surrounded by shooters, and the Bucks got a shooting 5, so Giannis plays the 4.

If you want to call those guys combo guards, go for it. But like... who cares? Is it helpful to call Jordan a combo guard? tbh I think you chose bad examples because Jordan and Kobe were maniacal scorers who did their best when they were confined to a shooting guard role in an offense (the triangle to be specific). Jordan and especially Kobe, when running the offense, took too many tough shots and stalled the offense.. So Phil Jackson managed the offense through Scottie Pippen and Shaq/Pau Gasol, freeing his all-time scorers to do what they did best. Jordan was a pretty elite creator, but Kobe (although he had the passing ability) was a famously reluctant passer. D-Wade is a sort of good example. He definitely spent some time playing a point guard like role... but he was a sneaky awful dribbler. He commanded enough respect that guys let him dribble, but it seemed like when he'd get pressured he'd turn the ball over a LOT. Dribbled the ball off his foot more than he'd like to admit. At the end of the day, even though he played a lot of lead guard, Wade was more like a small forward in the way he dominated post matchups and used his physicality, length, athleticism and strength to dominate.

imho combo guard is a backhanded compliment. They are point guard sized players who you don't love to have running your offense because they more so look for their own shot and usually can't guard anyone.

That's a huge over simplification

Players are defined at position by their strongest skill sets and who they are able to defend.

Kashi is nowhere near as effective guarding post up bigs as he is perimeter players.

Positions weren't made to just explain what was happening....

They were designed to provide an order a methodology

i said a half dozen things, so... are they all a "huge over simplification" or perhaps a series of huge over simplifications?

I agree that players are definied by their strongest skill set and who they are able to defend (which is why Kobe and Jordan and Wade are shooting guards). But there's lots of players that are so juiced up with strong skill sets that they have positional flexibility.

Never said anything about Kawhi guarding post up bigs. I said 4s. Giannis, Tobias Harris, Draymond, Aaron Gordon were his power forward potential matchups throughout the playoffs and none of them did a ton of posting up. Post up 4s are rare on good teams. I can't even think of one on a good team right now. Does Millsap still post up? Blake still does a little bit, but Detroit isn't a good team. I also disagree that Kawhi is less effective at guarding 4s. Everytime I've seen him defend the post, he's a strong, long armed, huge handed monster. If what his team needed was for him to lock down a post-up 4, I think he'd do it as well as almost anyone (maybe anyone?). He annihilated Giannis when switched on to him.

Sure, positions we made to "provide an order a methodology" or whatever. But when we as fans assess positions, we are perceiving, NOT structuring. So all we can talk about is how a player was used, by our perception. Good coaches maximize groups of skill sets together, and if that means having a wing tandem defend the rim while a big contains the pick & roll (the Heatles) or letting your Jokic center run the offense while the guards play as cutters, then that's what happens, positions be damned. Positions are sometimes helpful to talk about, and sometimes they're boring when fans insist on them. You know like when you're ranking players by positions and a few positionally ambiguous players get moved around so the ranking feels the best? Sometimes position stuff is generated by coaching, but sometimes we as fans "like" to see certain players as certain positions and that is when I think it becomes boring and silly.

IMO combo guards are really those that aren’t good enough to be considered a PG or SG but they’re good enough to play. Wade played PG as a rookie. He switched to SG in his second year because that is the position he preferred even though his role didn’t change much.

CoachD wrote:

LKN wrote:

CoachD wrote:Jordan and Kobe were Shooting Guards. There was nothing combo guard about them.

Wade played more point, but really out of necessity, and the fact that he was seen a little small for the SG spot. In terms of play style, he was a pure SG

This is not true at all.... Reggie Miller and Ray Allen are much better examples of quintessential shooting guards. Kobe and MJ ran the offense quite a bit. MJ was the primary playmaker on the Bulls through the first threepeat (particularly in the playoffs).

A prototypical shooting guard is SUPPOSED to be able to run plays and handle the offense a little bit. Just as a prototypical SF should. These shooting guards who essentially just shoot, were considered specialists in the old days

Allen could do much more than shoot pre-Boston.