Originally Posted by
Patrick Yates
As has been postulated on this board, we could be playing a lot of 4 guard linups, and that puts GH at the four. That might be out of position, yes?
It's a little bit contradictory to say that if Duke's playing a 4-guard lineup, Henderson would be playing power forward. The definition of a 4-guard lineup is that there are four guards on the floor, not two guards moonlighting as a small forward and a power forward. If Duke's playing a 4-guard lineup, why would they try to place players in traditional 1-through-5 positions? Wouldn't it be four people on the floor playing like guards with one big man in the middle? If you were going to number it, it might look like one 1, three 2/3s, and one 4/5. There's no reason that Henderson has to change his game because he's on court with three other guards, rather than two (or one) other guards.
If Duke threw a lineup of Paulus, Scheyer, Nelson, Henderson, and insert big man here on the floor, is there any reason that he would be asked to do the same things that a power forward does? For example, assume the lineup listed above matches up against UNC with Lawson, Ellington, Ginyard, Thompson, and Hansbrough. Would you want Henderson posting up Thompson down low, or playing inside the key, like a traditional four? I wouldn't - I'd much rather we spread the floor with the four guards and draw UNC's bigs away from the hoop. Now, on defense, Henderson might have to defend Thompson in the post. Or, they might have Nelson guard the post, put Scheyer on Ginyard, and Henderson on Ellington (or even Lawson). Does who he guards change whether he's playing the 2, the 3, or the 4? I'm not sure it does.
Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.
You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner
You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke