Well, for whatever reason he isnt striking anything into my head as far as being a major cog on that team in the state tournament. I know there was a guard or wing that was pretty good in the tournament, but something is telling me it wasnt him.

 

He was a solid PG, without him they are not successful at the state tournament. I am pretty sure he had his choice of basketball or football after HS.

Mike Fields has seen a lot of basketball. I would trust his judgement.

Now this one is a serious question, who was the point guard on the Warren Central team that won it all with Dewalt, Maresca, etc.

Brock Whitney.

Basketball, especially on the high school level, is a guard's game ...

 

Well said. Taking it a step further, it is a "point guard's" game.

On any level huh?

Can you even remember the names of the point guards on the teams that Shaq and Kobe won titles with the Lakers? How about the Bulls in the Jordan years? Who was the point guard on the Lofton championship team?

 

Now this one is a serious question, who was the point guard on the Warren Central team that won it all with Dewalt, Maresca, etc.

 

Never said it was the star position. Said it was the most important position on the floor.

Never said it was the star position. Said it was the most important position on the floor.

 

I was responding to thegame in the post preceding mine.

 

:thumb:

I was responding to thegame in the post preceding mine.

 

:thumb:

 

First of all, I don't think there are any "BAD" point guards on good NBA teams. They may not be the stars, or even an all-star, but they are solid at least. The lower the level the more important it is I think. I have had a couple of teams that had good players at most positions except for point guard. The person I played at point was a good 2 guard, but not a point, and I had no one else who could play that position. We had a good year record wise, but in the playoffs and a few times in the regular season we would play an athletic team that played FC man and we struggled badly to get the ball up the court or get into our offense or any of our sets. We didn't mind teams that zone pressed us, as we could get in the right spots and get the ball up the floor, but against really good athletic man, you need someone to break down the defense, and without a good point guard, or someone with good ballhandling skills etc...(no matter what size or position) you are not going to win against teams that play really good man D, and are very athletic to go along with that. On the other hand I had several teams that was loaded with guys that had at least good point guard skills and had very little or no post presence, and we won at the highest level with some of those teams. The worst part is some years I have had neither, and that is when it is really bad, like this year and we finished 16-8. Fun to argue about and listen to others ideas. I am just going by my own experience in coaching.

Good and bad is relative to the level you are playing. There will always be good and bad at any level.

Sparks and Hubbard are forwards. Three of the players are 6'3".

Good and bad is relative to the level you are playing. There will always be good and bad at any level.

 

Yes and if you will notice closely, I said I didn't think there were any BAD guards on GOOD NBA teams. But again I reiterate that I think the lower the level the more important guards are, because the higher the level the better and more skilled at every aspect are all the rest of the players.

This is a very interesting debate... It is my opinion that all five players on the floor are of utmost importance, whether they be gaurds, fowards, or big men. You win a game with five players, it is my observation that the thing that makes a point gaurd slightly more important than the other five; is that it is his responsibility to keep the other four happy, make the other four better, be the smartest player on the team, and be the coach on the floor, etc... Another thing that seperates a true point gaurd from other great players, is the ability to do great things without recieving great recognition. Whether a point gaurd is a great player, or not, should be based on his teams record, not his points, due to their responsibility to distribute rather than score...

Just my thoughts on the matter...

You gotta have a good guard to get the ball up the court or you won't need the big guy.

Mike Fields is a fairly sharp guy. But he is completely leaving out a key ingrediant. That is the coach.

Mike Fields is a fairly sharp guy. But he is completely leaving out a key ingrediant. That is the coach.

 

Fields himself is the coach.

Fields himself is the coach.

 

Yeah I have no idea how that would go. But if the team had a really good coach it could be very good, but theres a lot of coaches who could really screw that team up.