Kibitzer
Sky Soldier
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 5,676
- Reaction Score
- 24,752
A little BB history (from my personal archive, stored in my cranium
).
Flash back about 50+ years. BB lineups (and box scores) and offensive strategy were predicated om lineups comprising 2 G's, 2 , and 1 C (that big guy who usually posted up with his back to the basket).
Fast forward a few years (late 50's-early 60's) and a very crafty coach named Red Auerbach redefined the roles for his Boston Celtics, thus: PG (Cooz), SG (Sharman), SF (Heinsohn), PF (Satch), and C (Russ). This system clicked for 8 NBA Championships in a row, plus a few more, even as players left and were replaced by others.
What I refer to here as Red's creation became the model, copied almost everywhere. The greatest emulation was arguably the '69 Knicks: PG (Clyde), SG (Earl the Pearl). SF (Dollar Bill), PF (DeBusschere), and C (Willis).
At some point, somebody assigned numerical designations to these now universally accepted positions/roles: PG-1, SG-2, SF-3, PF-4, and C-5. This system used to be the private reserve of the most (self-appointed) "hip" BB aficionados, but it is now ubiquitously used. Indeed, many fans and observers consider the 1.2.3.4.5 designations like Holy Writ, but coaches like Geno are much more flexible in their deployment of players on offense.
Even the box scores have finally succumbed, just a little, to changing roles in lineups. We even see box scores with 3 or a C/F.
What's next? A "W" on a box score? Yikes!

Flash back about 50+ years. BB lineups (and box scores) and offensive strategy were predicated om lineups comprising 2 G's, 2 , and 1 C (that big guy who usually posted up with his back to the basket).
Fast forward a few years (late 50's-early 60's) and a very crafty coach named Red Auerbach redefined the roles for his Boston Celtics, thus: PG (Cooz), SG (Sharman), SF (Heinsohn), PF (Satch), and C (Russ). This system clicked for 8 NBA Championships in a row, plus a few more, even as players left and were replaced by others.
What I refer to here as Red's creation became the model, copied almost everywhere. The greatest emulation was arguably the '69 Knicks: PG (Clyde), SG (Earl the Pearl). SF (Dollar Bill), PF (DeBusschere), and C (Willis).
At some point, somebody assigned numerical designations to these now universally accepted positions/roles: PG-1, SG-2, SF-3, PF-4, and C-5. This system used to be the private reserve of the most (self-appointed) "hip" BB aficionados, but it is now ubiquitously used. Indeed, many fans and observers consider the 1.2.3.4.5 designations like Holy Writ, but coaches like Geno are much more flexible in their deployment of players on offense.
Even the box scores have finally succumbed, just a little, to changing roles in lineups. We even see box scores with 3 or a C/F.
What's next? A "W" on a box score? Yikes!
