RealGM

I am not impressed with point guards, they are the smallest player on the court and yield the least amount of value unless they are transcendent.

Unless you are getting Chris Paul, Ja Morant, Trae Young type of prospect, I don't see why you would draft one over the Do-It-All Forward. If a 6'8 player becomes a Gordon Hayward-level player, that's pretty good as long as you don't give them the max thinking they are gonna lead a team anywhere. Even the average Do-It-All Forward like Nic Batum is a good glue guy on a championship squad.

But the mid-level to average guard? What is that, a Mike Conley to Ricky Rubio to Derek Fisher, do you really need those kind of players on your team if you can get Do-It-All Forwards? If I can't get Damian Lillard at PG, I rather have Gordon Hayward as my main ball handler with Joe Ingles and Kawhi to help. You can put Joe Ingles out there, he'll do better than 90 percent of the guards in the NBA.

When Scottie Barnes was picked over Jalen Suggs, it was a no brainer to me. Jayson Tatum over Markelle Fultz was a no-brainer, even if Markelle never malfunctioned, he wasn't doing anything that was greater than what Jayson Tatum was doing if we look at the tape and stats. You pick the taller player that displays court sense, BB IQ, touch, feel, unless the smaller guy is a damn video game like Ja and Trae as prospects.

Rant over.

Fans and "analysts" still think Ricky Rubio and Rondo are good players just because they pass more than they score and can get a team into "offense".

Give me a break.

You got it backwards. The nerds are the ones who figured out that versatile 2-way forwards are the future of the league. It’s the “old school” types who fall in love with flashy shoot first undersized scoring guards.

The league is currently dominated 3 types of players:

Skilled big man
Versatile 2-way wing
Big ball-handling guard

This is the future of the NBA.

This doesn't really make sense because these positions don't really exist. Do it all forwards ARE the point guards. Lebron, Giannis, Luka is the future. They are both do-it-all forwards AND point guards.

Your argument becomes "draft the tall playmaker over a small one".

When will posters on RealGM learn that using a 4-5 game sample to claim one rookie is obviously better then another rookie is beyond dumb.

Eh.... its gonna be a min before folks in Miami are gonna asking for your news letter.

Kawhi to help. Gordon Hayward.

I'd take DJ Augustin over Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and D'Angelo Russell over Justise Winslow.

There's no hard fast rule in the NBA.

Duke4life831 wrote:When will posters on RealGM learn that using a 4-5 game sample to claim one rookie is obviously better then another rookie is beyond dumb.

Rhetorical question?

draftnightsuit wrote:You got it backwards. The nerds are the ones who figured out that versatile 2-way forwards are the future of the league. It’s the “old school” types who fall in love with flashy shoot first undersized scoring guards.

The league is currently dominated 3 types of players:

Skilled big man
Versatile 2-way wing
Big ball-handling guard

This is the future of the NBA.

No draft nerds are still in love with PGs, you see it all the time. People thought Jalen Suggs was better than Scottie Barnes when Jalen can't even get his own shot couldn't even get his own shot consistently. A point guard that can't get their own shot anytime they want is worthless on offense. Why would any rational coach, fan, analyst would want the player with the ball in their hand majority of the game, unable to score at will?

2-Way Forwards and Big Playmakers always been the the Queen on the Chess board, from Elgin Baylor to Big O to Dr.J to Magic Johnson to Larry Bird to Scottie Pippen to Kawhi to Lebron James to Luka Doncic.

They always were the best perimeter players players just like guards that can get buckets at will always are better than "True PGs".

It's just the 90s and 00s are anomalies about how basketball was played. It's slow and grind out, so of course some little guy that can pound the ball and run a set is valuable but most of the league history is dominated by big men and small forwards. It was either pound the paint with the big or you run and score with forwards.

Now we are back to running and gunning, but an entire generation was raised off of ugly iso ball of the 90s and 00s.

Basketball is a simple sport, you need a guard that can get buckets, forwards that can do a bit of everything and a big man to play big.

The 10 best players in league history are 6'6 and up for a reason and we still got people that act like PGs are like quarterbacks and they are not. They are like kickers, if your PG situation is the reason why your team sucks, then everything went to hell way before then. The kicker shouldn't be the reason why you lose the game.

Statlanta wrote:I'd take DJ Augustin over Michael Kidd-Gilchrist and D'Angelo Russell over Justise Winslow.

There's no hard fast rule in the NBA.

Indeed. Generalizations can help sometimes, but you can't be inflexible and dogmatic.

Like in the Mobley thread yesterday a poster said the Piston/Rockets were foolish for taking talented guards over a talented big because talented bigs are far more rare. In that case maybe it will prove true, but the Warriors took a talented big (Wiseman) over a guard (Ball) in the same situation last year and missed out because of that same sort of thinking. Every draft is different, every prospect is different.

threethehardway wrote:No draft nerds are still in love with PGs, you see it all the time. People thought Jalen Suggs was better than Scottie Barnes when Jalen can't even get his own shot couldn't even get his own shot consistently. A point guard that can't get their own shot anytime they want is worthless on offense. Why would any rational coach, fan, analyst would want the player with the ball in their hand majority of the game, unable to score at will?

Jalen Suggs and Scottie Barnes have both played like five games so far. Nobody should be remotely surprised if Suggs ends up being a better player long-term than Barnes even though Barnes has been amazing so far.

If your PG is your best player, you probably aren't winning a Championship.

Even with all the rule changes to try and promote perimeter play, the league is still ran by wings and forwards.

Goudelock wrote:

threethehardway wrote:No draft nerds are still in love with PGs, you see it all the time. People thought Jalen Suggs was better than Scottie Barnes when Jalen can't even get his own shot couldn't even get his own shot consistently. A point guard that can't get their own shot anytime they want is worthless on offense. Why would any rational coach, fan, analyst would want the player with the ball in their hand majority of the game, unable to score at will?

Jalen Suggs and Scottie Barnes have both played like five games so far. Nobody should be remotely surprised if Suggs ends up being a better player long-term than Barnes even though Barnes has been amazing so far.

They probably should tbh. Short of Barnes pulling a MCW, I would be shocked if Suggs turns out to be the better player. Barnes just looks much better than Suggs at virtually ever basketball skill at this point, aside from defense where I think they are actually comparable. Barnes has better vision, better playmaking, better athleticism, he’s faster and stronger, has a better handle, is a better shooter, has a much better post game.

It would honestly be crazy for Suggs to turn out to be the better player at this point. People will chime in with small sample size which is fair, but I defy those people to tell me one basketball skill Suggs has demonstrated to be better at than Barnes.

I would have to agree with the overall premise of the OP.

The best players in the modern NBA are Giannis/Durant/LeBron/Kawhi types. Two way dominant do it all forwards.

I wouldn’t trade Scottie Barnes for 3 Jalen Suggs, in terms of asset value.

QingJames wrote:

Goudelock wrote:

threethehardway wrote:No draft nerds are still in love with PGs, you see it all the time. People thought Jalen Suggs was better than Scottie Barnes when Jalen can't even get his own shot couldn't even get his own shot consistently. A point guard that can't get their own shot anytime they want is worthless on offense. Why would any rational coach, fan, analyst would want the player with the ball in their hand majority of the game, unable to score at will?

Jalen Suggs and Scottie Barnes have both played like five games so far. Nobody should be remotely surprised if Suggs ends up being a better player long-term than Barnes even though Barnes has been amazing so far.

They probably should tbh. Short of Barnes pulling a MCW, I would be shocked if Suggs turns out to be the better player. Barnes just looks much better than Suggs at virtually ever basketball skill at this point, aside from defense where I think they are actually comparable. Barnes has better vision, better playmaking, better athleticism, he’s faster and stronger, has a better handle, is a better shooter, has a much better post game.

It would honestly be crazy for Suggs to turn out to be the better player at this point. People will chime in with small sample size which is fair, but I defy those people to tell me one basketball skill Suggs has demonstrated to be better at than Barnes.

lol at barnes being a better shooter than suggs... just check their shooting mechanics

What do you think about OKC? They have nothing but Do-It- All Forwards. Do you think that's the way teams should build going forward?

gabri3l3 wrote:

QingJames wrote:

Goudelock wrote:
Jalen Suggs and Scottie Barnes have both played like five games so far. Nobody should be remotely surprised if Suggs ends up being a better player long-term than Barnes even though Barnes has been amazing so far.

They probably should tbh. Short of Barnes pulling a MCW, I would be shocked if Suggs turns out to be the better player. Barnes just looks much better than Suggs at virtually ever basketball skill at this point, aside from defense where I think they are actually comparable. Barnes has better vision, better playmaking, better athleticism, he’s faster and stronger, has a better handle, is a better shooter, has a much better post game.

It would honestly be crazy for Suggs to turn out to be the better player at this point. People will chime in with small sample size which is fair, but I defy those people to tell me one basketball skill Suggs has demonstrated to be better at than Barnes.

lol at barnes being a better shooter than suggs... just check their shooting mechanics

Seems like you’re the one who needs to check their shooting mechanics, friend. Scottie is regularly coming down and hitting 10-18 foot pull up jumpers off the dribble at more than twice the efficiency Suggs is right now. He’s completely altered his shot from college and has solid mechanics now, if a little stiff. He’s sinking way more mid range shots than Suggs.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/jalen-suggs-shot-chart

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/scottie-barnes-shot-chart-this-season

QingJames wrote:

gabri3l3 wrote:

QingJames wrote:They probably should tbh. Short of Barnes pulling a MCW, I would be shocked if Suggs turns out to be the better player. Barnes just looks much better than Suggs at virtually ever basketball skill at this point, aside from defense where I think they are actually comparable. Barnes has better vision, better playmaking, better athleticism, he’s faster and stronger, has a better handle, is a better shooter, has a much better post game.

It would honestly be crazy for Suggs to turn out to be the better player at this point. People will chime in with small sample size which is fair, but I defy those people to tell me one basketball skill Suggs has demonstrated to be better at than Barnes.

lol at barnes being a better shooter than suggs... just check their shooting mechanics

Seems like you’re the one who needs to check their shooting mechanics, friend. Scottie is regularly coming down and hitting 10-18 foot pull up jumpers off the dribble at more than twice the efficiency Suggs is right now. He’s completely altered his shot from college and has solid mechanics now, if a little stiff. He’s sinking way more mid range shots than Suggs.

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/jalen-suggs-shot-chart

https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/scottie-barnes-shot-chart-this-season

this is actually stupid. barnes hasnt been a shooter his whole career and cant shoot from outside 16 feet reliably yet. suggs been pulling from the logo and getting more defensive attention from the perimiter, been a great shooter his whole life. also shooting almost 87 poercent from the foul line.... davis bertans is struggling is barnes better than him at shooting too?

threethehardway wrote:I am not impressed with point guards, they are the smallest player on the court and yield the least amount of value unless they are transcendent.

Unless you are getting Chris Paul, Ja Morant, Trae Young type of prospect, I don't see why you would draft one over the Do-It-All Forward. If a 6'8 player becomes a Gordon Hayward-level player, that's pretty good as long as you don't give them the max thinking they are gonna lead a team anywhere. Even the average Do-It-All Forward like Nic Batum is a good glue guy on a championship squad.

But the mid-level to average guard? What is that, a Mike Conley to Ricky Rubio to Derek Fisher, do you really need those kind of players on your team if you can get Do-It-All Forwards? If I can't get Damian Lillard at PG, I rather have Gordon Hayward as my main ball handler with Joe Ingles and Kawhi to help. You can put Joe Ingles out there, he'll do better than 90 percent of the guards in the NBA.

When Scottie Barnes was picked over Jalen Suggs, it was a no brainer to me. Jayson Tatum over Markelle Fultz was a no-brainer, even if Markelle never malfunctioned, he wasn't doing anything that was greater than what Jayson Tatum was doing if we look at the tape and stats. You pick the taller player that displays court sense, BB IQ, touch, feel, unless the smaller guy is a damn video game like Ja and Trae as prospects.

Rant over.

Fans and "analysts" still think Ricky Rubio and Rondo are good players just because they pass more than they score and can get a team into "offense".

Give me a break.

Mike Conley = Derek Fisher

Il make it simple for you OP. There is a lot less tall people that can dribble, shoot and create at a high enough level to be able to play the point. The examples you listed are either not capable of playing the point or are a generational type player.

We all saw what happened to the Clippers when they entrusted Kawhi to play the point. They could not score to save their lives and got dumped on by the Nuggets.