Don't entirely oversimplify/oversell the concept!
Some posters seem to have misconstrued Capel's remarks into a belief that you can have a great team solely on the basis of having an excellent true point guard to run the show. In this extreme view the other four players are simply interchangeable components with no defined position or role.
This is an oversimplification!
It is true that you do not need a classical back to the basket Center to be successful.
However, you still need a player or two with the ability to post up on offense and score inside (e.g., think WVU's Konate). You need it to get the defense to collapse or sag to enable the kick out to the perimeter for an uncontested or weakly contested 3-point jumper. You also need good offensive rebounders to follow missed jumpers. Such players as these with an inside game are also needed to serve on defense as rim-protectors, shot blockers and strong defensive rebounders.
The bottom line is that a couple of these so-called position-less players need to have the requisite size (i.e, some combo of height, length-reach, hops and width) to execute the offensive and defensive inside game.
You cannot only have four small to medium size (i.e, big guard-wing forward type) guys under the direction of a point guard and expect to succeed at a high level. At least one or two of the four need to be physically capable of a strong inside game even if they aren't classical back to the basket centers. If such a player is skilled enough to play the face the basket game and able to step out and shoot the 3-ball like a classical wing player that is desirable and a bonus.
At the end of the day you need players for three roles. You need point guards to run the show, wings (i.e., small forward, 2-guard types) and inside types (i.e., big forwards/center types or "oversize" small forwards).
In practice/reality, it is not simply a point guard and four fully interchangeable guys (i.e., like an idealized NBA team lineup).
Some posters seem to have misconstrued Capel's remarks into a belief that you can have a great team solely on the basis of having an excellent true point guard to run the show. In this extreme view the other four players are simply interchangeable components with no defined position or role.
This is an oversimplification!
It is true that you do not need a classical back to the basket Center to be successful.
However, you still need a player or two with the ability to post up on offense and score inside (e.g., think WVU's Konate). You need it to get the defense to collapse or sag to enable the kick out to the perimeter for an uncontested or weakly contested 3-point jumper. You also need good offensive rebounders to follow missed jumpers. Such players as these with an inside game are also needed to serve on defense as rim-protectors, shot blockers and strong defensive rebounders.
The bottom line is that a couple of these so-called position-less players need to have the requisite size (i.e, some combo of height, length-reach, hops and width) to execute the offensive and defensive inside game.
You cannot only have four small to medium size (i.e, big guard-wing forward type) guys under the direction of a point guard and expect to succeed at a high level. At least one or two of the four need to be physically capable of a strong inside game even if they aren't classical back to the basket centers. If such a player is skilled enough to play the face the basket game and able to step out and shoot the 3-ball like a classical wing player that is desirable and a bonus.
At the end of the day you need players for three roles. You need point guards to run the show, wings (i.e., small forward, 2-guard types) and inside types (i.e., big forwards/center types or "oversize" small forwards).
In practice/reality, it is not simply a point guard and four fully interchangeable guys (i.e., like an idealized NBA team lineup).
