Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Strom is so, so on point. 
Need players to rebound and defend against size - not 'positionless' in that respect. But on offense, there are plenty of skillsets that can work with so many different size players filling them. 
For instance, I grew up a Chicago Bulls fan. In the 70's they had a 'true' point (Van Lier) at 6'1", a true sg (Sloan) at 6'4", two true forwards (Love & Walker), and  true 5 (Boerwinkle) at 7'0"" Each of those players skills fit the conventional definition of what their size and position should encompass, and they were perenniel contenders.
In the 90's the Bulls had either Kerr, Paxson, or BJ Armstrong at 6'1" at the guard spot opposite Jordan for a large amount of time. On defense each of these small players guarded the other team's conventional point, but on offense they were pure wings, with Jordan, Pippen, or Kukoc playing the point. 
 

Stormin’ Norman and Sloan...very good defensive backcourt!


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app
Posted
19 hours ago, Bigred3588 said:

By definition, "less" is an adjective suffix meaning "without." Ergo, positionless means without having a position. You just described a lineup consisting of 5 distinct positions. Just because you put more than 1 of them in a lineup doesn't mean the "traditional" roles don't need to be filled. You can call them a wing, but one of those wings needs to be able to shoot. It'll just be someone an inch or two taller than your prototypical SG. The other wing still needs to provide some offense as well as some rebounding. Call me crazy, but that sounds eerily familiar to the responsibilities of a SF. The only difference between what you're describing and the way teams have always been built is that traditional bigs are expected to be more athletic/mobile.  

As far as the IU examples, well, they're honestly kind of counter-productive. We've been using that approach for 8 years and made 2 sweet sixteen appearances. So sure, I guess you can build a program that way. But like I said before, I'm not sure it's the best approach.

The “positionless” in positionless basketball isn’t meant to be a definition of the word, it’s  description of how the game is played in 2019. It’s not even a system that a coach chooses to play, it’s simple how the game is played in 2019. 

It’s about having skilled players that can do multiple things at every position, both offensively and defensively. It’s about bigs that can switch out on the perimeter defensively and players offensively that have multiple skills. It doesn’t mean there are literally no positions. 

As far as the IU point, it’s not like IU is the only program that plays like this. But again, it’s not really a system you choose, it’s simply how basketbalk is played in 2019. Look at Villanova’s last title, Spellman and Pascal could switch into almost anyone defensively and then offensively spent most of their time setting ball screens and popping out for 3’s or spotting up for 3’s while Brunson posted or DiVencenzo penetrated. 

 

Posted
17 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Back to Loveday. I think if IU pushes they will have real good chance.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

I hope so. Kind of the perfect scenario. Will have a year under his belt before we will NEED him to contribute. But if he’s ready there will be minutes his freshmen year

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 years later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...