What is your definition of a tweener?

[mrhonline]

Differences in definition of a "tweener" might be causing some confusion, I think.

I define "tweener" as a bad thing. I see it as someone who can't guard any position effectively, thereby being "beTWEEN" positions. I see Antoine Walker and Al Harrington as classic tweeners Hawks' fans had to endure. I've also never found a player's offensive ability to be relevant to the discussion of "tweenerism."

IMHO, the more open a player's offensive game is, generally the more useful he is to a coach (e.g., Robert Horry). Defense, however, is an altogether different issue. If a player is a defensive weakspot at multiple positions, his offensive abilities are diminished.

By my definition, I don't categorize Josh Smith as a tweener. (IOW, his versatility doesn't equate to his being a "tweener").

What is your definition?

[AtLaS]

Josh is definitely a tweener IMO, but I don't see that as a bad thing. A better word would be "versatile".

I consider a tweener as a player who's skillset is somewhere in the middle of 2 positions. Dwyane Wade is a tweener, but it doesn't hinder his game at all, nor does it make him a bad player.

Josh is a tweener but he's better suited at the 4 IMO.

[shug94]

I think a tweener is someone who is either the wrong height/weight for his skillset, or is between two positions, in terms of physical size.

PG size - 6'1"

PG/SG Tweener - 6'2"->6'4"

SG size - 6'5"->6'7"

SG/SF Tweener - No such thing, just a wing player.

SF size - 6'8"->6'11"

This is where it get's muddy. You can be a PF at 6'9", but the difference between SF and PF is normally a weight/strength thing. Same with C's.

[Diesel]

I would say that tweener really has little to do with Size...

I would say it has more to do with how a player plays.

Toni Kukoc was the classic tweener. He was 7 foot. By your definition he should have been a 5.

However, his style of play was more suited to Sf than even PF.

Somebody said being a tweener is not a bad thing. Actually, it's not a good thing either. I think that there are pluses and minuses to it depending on the situation.

Dirk Nowitski is another tweener. Sometimes it's good, but in the playoffs, it's proven very bad.

[Swatguy]

True "D", it has nothing to do as size.

Also today's NBA with the advent of legal "zone defense", guys weaknesses are submitted to schemes and are not as liable as "Man to Man" defense.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

Also today's NBA with the advent of legal "zone defense", guys weaknesses are submitted to schemes and are not as liable as "Man to Man" defense.

---

This is why I say just play Smoove at 3. The biggest knocks on Smoove is that he doesn't shoot from outside well and that he doesn't defend the 3 well. If we play a Junk defense like a Box and 1 or a triangle and 2, Smoove can be the Rover and all of his help defense and shot blocking skills will be maximized. If we leave it to Smoove either playing Middle of a zone or playing man to man against bigs, he will get posted up and his defense will mean nothing.

Moreover, there's no Post offense from Smoove.

Get this:

People on HS want to allowed Smoove to play PF next to Zaza.. Who is a 45% shooter from the field...

What that translates to is with Smoove playing High post and taking his shots from the high post at a clip at best 46% and with Zaza averaging about 45% from the field... that means that our inside game SUCKS... If we don't find a way to score inside, we will continue to lose.

The defense can be fixed or hidden, but the lack of low post scoring cannot.

[frosgrim]

So, to summarize a tweener is someone who has the offensive skill sets of one position, but not the defense to guard that position?

Then the flip side of a tweener is a player with the ability to guard several positions but the offensive skill set that does not meet any position, thus earning the label versatile.

On the Hawks the first def pegs Salim to a "T". Kid shoots very well, but has the body and of a pg, but the skill set of a SG. Thus, his defense does not match his offensive sets.

The second matches Josh Smith. His defense allows him to guard PFs, SFs and the slower SGs. However, his offense is still a question mark. He doesn't (yet)have the skills to be a pure SF or a pure PF, thus he just scores using what he has.

In the end, the tweener is much more damaging to a team as the team has to cover the defensive liability. Any coach worth his salt could use a versatile player such as Josh in his offense. Meaning that a versatile player is a liability when you have a limited offensive coaching staff, such as the Hawks.

As I write this I just wonder what Josh would have already done in a wide open offense like in Dallas or in Golden State, or even in Aldeman's system that he ran in Sactown.

[AHF]

I think thereare two ways the term "tweener" is used:

(1) A player who is too small to guard one position that he can play and who is too slow to guard the position below that (like a college PF who is too small to handle the PF position but too slow to guard NBA SFs).

(2) A player who can play either of at least two positions but don't physically match the mold for the positions - ala Wade, Gordon, Chuck Hayes, etc. These guys can handle either position but don't fit the mold for either one.

The first example is a tweener who is going to have a hard time being successful in the NBA. The other example is an asset.

[Diesel]

In some cases, the tweener lacks the ability to play defense on any position.

I think Tweener is just a player who has multiple skillset but not the right skillset to match any classical positions needs.

For instance.

Toni Kukoc = 7 footer. But he was soft. He was a tweener. He wasn't a tweener merely because he couldn't defend the PF position..(He had a hard time defending the Sf position too)... WHat made him a tweener is that by PLAY he had many of the skills you would look for in a Sf. Even though by Size, you would hope that he would play PF or C.

Here's another one:

Shareef Abdur Rahim. Another tweener. He had the PF skillset without the size.

Charles Barkley. Same thing.

Now people say that Smoove is a 4. Maybe they forgot Al Harrington. Al was a 4.. one of BK's first versatile players. However, Baby Al had a post game (if Nothing else). He too liked to shoot the long ball... but his bread and butter was taking people to the low post and using them.

When we got rid of Al to make room for Marvin (because that's all it really was).. We lost that skillset. Since Al Left, there has been a low post void. The people said Smoove can replace Al.. however, Smoove didn't fill the void. Until the void is filled, we can forget winning seasons.

[frosgrim]

I slightly disagree with the assessment of why we traded Al: it was to make room for both Josh Smith and Marvin Williams, but more importantly, I think BK had in mind a major trade with Al to get vet low-post player (who played defense) and a pg. The ownership issue really screwed up the plan. I honestly believe Al was going to GS for some combination of Murphy and Monta Ellis or Pietrus. The foolishness with the courts threw trades into a tailspin. The fact that we got the number 11 pick for Al is amazing (and lucky as hell). We can argue these fine points all we want in another thread I suppose.

However with the above in mind, I completely agree with you that without a low post threat we are stuck in a 30-36 win mode. I do believe that Smith has improved his post game and Horford will bring a post presence as well. If Woody can properly utilize the combination of Smith, Horf and Shellhead, then we should have a good post game. At this point in time I think we have to wait until December to see what sort of team we have.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Now people say that Smoove is a 4. Maybe they forgot Al Harrington. Al was a 4

---

Funny how you claim Smith doesn't want to play the 4 when he hasn't stated it publicly, like Al has. Al came out and said he wanted to play the 3 and that it would be a big factor in determining where he went in free agency.

He also shot nearly 300 3 pointers last season.

Al's "post game" is nowhere near as effective as you make it out to be. He has no hops so against bigger players he was frequently forced to do a "Zaza" throwing up a prayer and hoping to draw a foul. He was much more effective posting up against opposing 3s where he had a size and strength advantage.

But despite all the evidence to the contrary, and Al's public statments, you still say he is a 4.

[Iman]

I like the above definitions of tweeners, but I'd say size is usually a bigger factor than skillset.

One thing I do see is this question just gave Diesel another chance to hack at Marvin when in effect he might be the least "tweener" that we have on our team. Actually Speedy is the main Hawk that can only play one position. Horford probably is basically a PF, Chillz a SF. We'll see about Acie, but the rest of the Hawks are tweeners to me, including Joe.

[AHF]

Harrington 2004:

Quote:

---

"I am a small forward."

---

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/feature_har...ton_040223.html

Harrington 2006:

Quote:

---

Harrington said he preferred to play small forward so he could "bully all the other 3s,"

---

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...SPGL2JT39M1.DTL

Pacer's GM 2007: Harrington traded to Warriors because he couldn't play PF for us and was playing SF where we want Granger to play

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2733891

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Harrington 2004:

Quote:

---

"I am a small forward."

---

http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/feature_har...ton_040223.html

Harrington 2006:

Quote:

---

Harrington said he preferred to play small forward so he could "bully all the other 3s,"

---

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...SPGL2JT39M1.DTL

Pacer's GM 2007: Harrington traded to Warriors because he couldn't play PF for us and was playing SF where we want Granger to play

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2733891

---

Thanks. Somehow i don't think Diesel will even believe Harrington.

[AtLaS]

Quote:

---

Since Al Left, there has been a low post void. The people said Smoove can replace Al.. however, Smoove didn't fill the void. Until the void is filled, we can forget winning seasons.

---

Funny how you support Harrington when he played PF, yet Harrington was only a 45% shooter. Not to mention, Al was one of the worst defensive PFs I've ever seen.

[exodus]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Since Al Left, there has been a low post void. The people said Smoove can replace Al.. however, Smoove didn't fill the void. Until the void is filled, we can forget winning seasons.

---

Funny how you support Harrington when he played PF, yet Harrington was only a 45% shooter. Not to mention, Al was one of the worst defensive PFs I've ever seen.

---

[Diesel]

I believe in an inside out game.

45% shooter true. My hope was that we would get a real PG who would only throw it to Al when he was set up in the lowpost. And a coach with enough Balls to mandate that he play in the low post.

Let's apply that same thing to Smoove. Smoove doesn't have a low post game.. so having a coach mandate that Smoove play in the lowpost will give us Nothing.

Put it out there... For you statheads... Which of you say that Al didn't have a low post game? Which of you say that Smoove plays the low post offense better than Al? Put it on the record!

[exodus]

Quote:

---

45% shooter true. My hope was that we would get a real PG who would only throw it to Al when he was set up in the lowpost. And a coach with enough Balls to mandate that he play in the low post.

---

It had to be the coaches fault. Never mind that Harrington said himself that he preferred to play the 3 over playing down low. That doesn't matter.

Shooting percentages only matter when they fit the agenda. In all other cases they are null and void.

I hereby dub thee Agenda-Man!

[Diesel]

Nice try to change the subject.

I even like the picture of your brother...

butback to the subject...

Put it out there... For you statheads... Which of you say that Al didn't have a low post game? Which of you say that Smoove plays the low post offense better than Al? Put it on the record!

[Guest Walter]

That's how I define tweener.

Actually, Horford is a prototypical NBA Pf and MW seems more a Sf (if only because of his lacking toughness), but SW, JS (in my op more Sf), Childress, maybe even Law, Salim, AJ, are all 'tweeners. Given that we likely intend to play Horford at center our whole roster is 'tweener filled.

W