RealGM

We've all heard about them - guys who are stuck between positions. When translated to the NBA, the invariably play one of their possible positions while bringing elements of the other(s). There are common tweeners (1/2s, 3/4s) and then not-so-common ones (basically any in which the positions don't abutt). Which do you think are the best and worst positional combinations for tweeners in adjacent positions (1/2, 2/3, 3/4, 4/5) and in non-adjacent ones (everything else)?

My thoughts on this once some of you have replied, so my opinions do no swaying.

1/5 like Magic.

Bargnani refuses to be defined by any position.

3/4s with shaky or inadequate quickness (usually defensively) - worst

4/5s or 2/3s... 4/5s - best, and specifically part of that is, the range of size, mobility, and skill-set of the player is either there enough, or respectable, to play in general.

With 3/4s, a pretty good deal of them are really stuck in between two different worlds... wing play and interior play. Lacking some thing or more, that is important, to make them a better and more commonly used/fitting player.

3/4s..........as mentioned its two different worlds.

Agreed with the 3/4.... much different skillsets required. Only a handful of players can effectively play both positions (such as Shawn Marion, Lamar Odom, a few others).

Additionally on the defensive end, most combo forwards either lack the height to guard PF effectively, or the speed to guard SF. Or both on occasion. Combo guards (1/2) don't have that problem, nor wings (2/3), nor post players (4/5).

That all being said, an effective combo forward is a very useful tool for a team to have, probably moreso than any other combination of positions, due to the mismatches it can create.

microfib4thewin wrote:1/5 like Magic.

lmao /end thread please

Yeah I think 3/4 is the most ineffective one by far, because it is mostly about size instead of style. Like if you have a SG in a PG's body and a PG in a SG's body, you're fine. But a tweener forward is usually labeled as such because of his size, not because of his style. Dirk has a perimeter game but there is no doubt he is a PF because he would get absolutely murdered defensively trying to keep up with SF's. Most tweener forwards have this disadvantage (and to be fair, they often usually have an advantage offensively, but in the end, it's not as important). They are usually either short and bulky (like say a Corliss Williamson, who created mismatches offensively, but couldn't really ever find anyone to guard defensively) or tall and too skinny. Anthony Randolph's draft stock is currently falling and probably partially for this reason, and you can look at a guy like Rashard Lewis who has the same problem.

Ultimately, I think a tweener isn't truly effective as such unless he could consistently start at both positions on a legitimately contending team. Very, very few players in this league qualify at the forward spots, if any. The only that come close (off the top of my head) are Josh Smith, Odom, and maybe a couple others situationally. But I still really have serious doubts that anyone could do it.

mitchweber wrote:Ultimately, I think a tweener isn't truly effective as such unless he could consistently start at both positions on a legitimately contending team. Very, very few players in this league qualify at the forward spots, if any. The only that come close (off the top of my head) are Josh Smith, Odom, and maybe a couple others situationally. But I still really have serious doubts that anyone could do it.

I agree with the point in general, but I disagree about labeling guys like that as tweeners. In my opinion, if you can play one or more of the positions both ways (guys like Odom and Smith can), you're no longer a tweener.

microfib4thewin wrote:1/5 like Magic.

Someone give this man a prize

1/2 creates the least problems, guard play between the 1 and 2 has a much smaller difference gap than the 3/4 and 4/5. As stated beforehand 3/4 creates the most problems due to whats expected from small forwards (versatility) and powerforwards (postplay).

tkb wrote:

mitchweber wrote:Ultimately, I think a tweener isn't truly effective as such unless he could consistently start at both positions on a legitimately contending team. Very, very few players in this league qualify at the forward spots, if any. The only that come close (off the top of my head) are Josh Smith, Odom, and maybe a couple others situationally. But I still really have serious doubts that anyone could do it.

I agree with the point in general, but I disagree about labeling guys like that as tweeners. In my opinion, if you can play one or more of the positions both ways (guys like Odom and Smith can), you're no longer a tweener.

Yeah, I mean I guess the real definition of a tweener is a guy who really doesn't have a defined position, as opposed to kind of having two defined positions. But at this point, I still don't know if anyone qualifies. Like at this point in his career, with the weight he has added, is Odom really still quick enough laterally to keep up with other SFs?

While Smith and Odom both can play PF, are they the kind of guys you'd choose to put with Bynum/Gasol and Horford (maybe not right now, but later on)? Or just on a contending team next to a big like those top guys? Both Odom/Smith have the height and length, but they're still undersized mass-wise at power foward, and are moreso wing-style players, than interior players. In addition to that, both aren't a respectable jumpshooting threat at all. Which may well continue for Smith, too.

I'd rather have a traditional-sized type of role-playing PF that can defend, rebound, differs offensively, and makes the mid-range j. Rather than Odom or Smith next to my star/main big man.

RnB wrote:

microfib4thewin wrote:1/5 like Magic.

Someone give this man a prize

1/2 creates the least problems, guard play between the 1 and 2 has a much smaller difference gap than the 3/4 and 4/5. As stated beforehand 3/4 creates the most problems due to whats expected from small forwards (versatility) and powerforwards (postplay).

I disagree with that. It takes a certain skillset to be able to play point guard in the league. 1/2 tweeners are forced to play point simply because they are too short to be shooting guards. Juan Dixon is an example of a terrible tweener. There are some good ones like Iverson and Ellis, but they tend to only play shooting guard.

2/3 causes the least problems because they are asked to do similar things and are interchangable on offense and defence. As long as you're between 6'5 and 6'8, you can play either position.

I think we need to officially acknowledge the difference between a tweener and a combo.

Tweener is someone stuck between 2 spots, struggles with either of them do to lack of a tool. (too short for PF, too slow for a SF) Where as a combo is someone that can play both. We need to understand the differences.

A big thing also to consider is the NBA position is mostly due to who you defend, rather than what you do on offense. Most of the problems with a tweener is due to them not having a clear position to defend.

Yep.