share

It's still not a PG league (as far as winning a title)

cward23
Registered User
Joined: 04/16/2011
Posts: 617
Points: 170
Offline
It's still not a PG league (as far as winning a title)

For all the hype pg's get they still don't bring you a title. Top point guards are great when it comes to the regular season and getting the press but when it comes playoff time it seems a very good big and or a elite Wing man is what it takes to get a title. Boston won it but Rondo wasn't what he is today. So for all the hype point guards get they still don't equate to a team getting a title


rileymcshea3
rileymcshea3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/31/2011
Posts: 1511
Points: 1540
Offline
Yeah I think you need someone

Yeah I think you need someone in the clutch because you win games in the 4th quater just lookmat the Mavs with Dirk or Kobe on the Lakers and then the guy with the most titles MJ

PulseGlazer
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2011
Posts: 1281
Points: 1906
Offline
What PG is on a team you

What PG is on a team you think would contend and how, exactly, is that their fault? Rose is on a great team, but he's the sole scorer. Paul, Deron, and others are on crap teams. Nash's career is quite different if his guys don't get hurt or suspended while he was at his peak. Westbrook just had his first big failure and is, what? 21? A bit of an assumption that PG's can't or won't win.

BallinlikeMJ23
BallinlikeMJ23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2011
Posts: 83
Points: 196
Offline
I think some of the

I think some of the stereotypes have been debunked on what it takes to win NBA championships, with Dallas this year....

I don't think teams patterning their rosters after NBA championship teams anymore...I think the focus is getting the best players that mesh together and are lead by a great head coach, that's really the winning formula for all professional sports teams.

I think you still get the best players availible that fit in your lineup, and try to create depth.

I feel that if the player is good enough you can build your team around any position...PG, SG, SF, PF, C.

BallinlikeMJ23
BallinlikeMJ23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2011
Posts: 83
Points: 196
Offline
rileymcshea3

rileymcshea3, who do you consider "clutch"?

Was Dirk clutch before this year?.....most would say 'NO'

The clutch connotation is overrated...Robert Horry hit more game winning shots than a lot of great players but was he the main reason why the Spurs were great for all those years....Most would say 'NO'.

Dirk started to become "clutch" to people all of a sudden, how did that change?....

Because his team was better, he had more help around him, he had more confidence in himself and his team.

It doesn't take a clutch player to win championships, it takes a good team with great players....and good teams have more confidence in their abilities, thus are better in tight situations.

NYK2010
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 2462
Points: 1498
Offline
You forget the Bulls and

You forget the Bulls and Lakers had 2 of the greatest of all time and some great role players too.

Also with great 1 on 1 players and the triangle system you don't need a great PG.

Rondo, Westbrook, Rose have all made the Conf. Finals at least already.

If you put Deron Williams on the Mavs they'd rarely ever lose.

sacphil_08
Registered User
Joined: 05/05/2010
Posts: 481
Points: 617
Offline
Let's look at it this way...

Let's look at it this way... Most top tier PGs such as d-will, cp3, etc normally get drafted really early in their drafts right? That means that normally they are the best player on their teams and they become the "building block" of their team. the worst teams dont normally have a great option to pair along with these PGs and it seems that they never get enough help. here are some examples:

2000 season-Allen iverson was league mvp, led his team to the finals only to lose to the lakers with the opposing PG being derek fisher. obviously AI is the better of the two but the difference was the big men. Shaq vs mutumbo and matt geiger lol

2001 & 02' seasons- jason kidd was an all star, in his prime defensively, as a playmaker, everything you could ask a pg to be and playing at a HOF level. once again the lakers are there with fisher as PG and shaq and kobe and of course they lose. LA just had a better team in and out and the east was pretty bad anyway

2003- tony parker vs jason kidd- obviously kidd is the better of the two but the difference once again was the big men duncan in his prime not to mention with the admiral, vs kenyon martin and the rest of the nets front line

i could go on for a long time but the point is the big men and great wing players win championships, not PGs. Chauncey billups and tony parker were different kinds of circumstances; tony parker was drafted in the 20s and no one besides the spurs expected him to become the player he has become. chauncey was clutch and the finals mvp but the team chemistry/dynamics those pistons had was on a different level.

Basically, great pgs just dont get rings when they are the best player. J kidd got his but he was probably the 3rd or 4th maybe 5th best player this year. Magic johnson did it but he had a stacked team with a bunch of great contributors not to mention HOFers.

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
Jason Kidd

Dallas would not have won without Jason Kidd, one of the best ever. Sure he wasnt the Kidd of old, but I would argue that Kidd was more important to this Mavs team, than Rondo was to the Boston Team that won a championship. Point guards can win but they need good players around them. A point guard job is to lead, but you have to have somebody to follow.

Rose did not win a title, but it took a focus Lebron James to stop him. Look at much havoc the top point guards create. Paul gave the Lakers a fit with a bunch of D League players on his squad. Jeff Teague energized the Hawks,

Johnny Chill
Johnny Chill's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/20/2011
Posts: 722
Points: 584
Offline
J.Kidd

I still can't believe he is ranked #3 all time in 3 pointers made. Someone needs to do a recount..haha

boxn1
boxn1's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/11/2010
Posts: 266
Points: 103
Offline
What is true is that you need

What is true is that you need a pg that fits your teams needs and makes the correct plays for everyone. Jason Kidd was that for Dallas, D Fish has been that for L.A. and Rondo still is. Thats 3 diff types of pg's yet all were a success because they fit the teams they are on perfectly. Building a full cohesive unit is about to become just that more important depending on rule changes,talent alone doesn't win,honestly, it never did.

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
Wing players dont win either

Its mainly big men that win. Kobe won but he had Shaq and when he didnt the team struggled. Then he won again when Gasol came.Wade won but he had Shaq. Garnett wasnt the biggest difference maker to that celtics team. Outside of Jordan and Isiah every champion in the last 20 years has had a big guy that was a difference Maker.

I still believe that the league is as talented as ever at the pg spot, but they are mostly young, and many of them dont have good talent around them.

Johnny Chill
Johnny Chill's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/20/2011
Posts: 722
Points: 584
Offline
Tony Parker and Chaucey Billups

says "Hi"

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
Boxn1 I agree

I agree that you have to have a pg that fits your team style of play. Fisher is not an elite pg and never was, but he sure hit his share of big shots for the lakers. Rondo has flaws, but he is the perfect pg for the celtics.

jonus grumby
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2011
Posts: 184
Points: 51
Offline
it depends on how PG is

it depends on how PG is defined. When the Bulls won titles Paxson or Harper was introduced as the PG but in reality Jordan or Pippen played the point on offense and Pax or Harper would play the role of SG. Same goes for Kobe.

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
Say bye Tony and Chancey

Tony had Tim Duncan. Chancey had Rasheed and Wallace. I would argue that Rasheed put that pistons team over the top. My statement was that there has not been a team that has won a championship in recent memory outside of Mike and Zeke that did not have a big man that was difference maker. Duncan and Wallace were difference makers.

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
Good Point

Scottie was without question the point guard of the Bulls and certainly the would not have a title without him. He really established the point-forward position or definitely took it to another level.

B-ball fan
Registered User
Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 2153
Points: 2328
Offline
Having a solid pg is a

Having a solid pg is a necessity, but big men are still the most important players for a title team. There are many very good pgs in the league who could start for a title winning team, but the number of big men you could say that about is smaller. Big men can make more of an impact on both ends of the floor.

Jason Kidd wasn't really a pure pg for Dallas. He only played pg when Barea or Terry wasn't in the game, and mostly he brought leadership, perimeter defense and spot up shooting.

Also worth considering is how many pgs get considered great pgs. More pgs have household names than centers. Johnny Chill above mentioned Tony Parker and Chauncey Billups, but honestly, despite the fact that they are typically considered top 10 pgs, they weren't their team's definite MVPs. Those Pistons were a very complete team and the Spurs were centered around Duncan. They are just two of many great starting caliber pgs.

TallmanNYC
TallmanNYC's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/04/2010
Posts: 2117
Points: 1192
Offline
I can't believe the negatives

I can't believe the negatives on this post when it is clearly still true. Did you guys even watch the Finals? J. Kidd was playing as a defensive stopper 2G by the end of it. JJ Barea and J. Terry were playing the PG spot in that they were initiating the offense and guarding the opposing team's PG. The Heat basically didn't even have a PG on the floor, just short 2Gs and that waste of space Mike Bibby (worst statistical peformance in the history of the NBA playoffs by someone who played over 400 minutes). The finals were won, again, by the team with the best big men (Dirk and Tyson). Tyson protected the rim and Dirk held down the defensive boards. Yes lots of other things were going on, but year after year it is big men who deliver the ultimate championship, with Jordan and Isiah Thomas being the exception to this rule.

NJHooper95
NJHooper95's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/19/2010
Posts: 568
Points: 923
Offline
I dont agree

I watch the finals and Every fourth quarter comeback was speared when J-Kidd was in the game and kept the team poised. He was a pure point guard. He still led the team in assist and made key plays. Yes he was spotting up but that was part of the game plan.

NYK2010
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 2462
Points: 1498
Offline
Billups was MVP not Ben or

Billups was MVP not Ben or Sheed.

Sheed averaged 13 ppg in the playoffs with Detroit shooting .413 the year they won the title.

He wasn't as clutch as Robert Horry

Billups got the name Mr. Big Shot for a reason.

Ben Wallace couldn't stop the best inside players Shaq and Duncan by himself anyway.

Expecting 38 year old Kidd to dominate doesn't make sense he played well in the 4th qtr guarding Wade esp.

B-ball fan
Registered User
Joined: 08/01/2009
Posts: 2153
Points: 2328
Offline
J-Kidd

Yes, he was an important part of Dallas' game plan, but not as a pure point. He didn't attack on the pick and roll; Terry and Barea did. He didn't lead the break as frequently or effectively as Barea, and he wasn't asked to drive and kick. Yes, he did hold significant pg responsibilities, but he functioned more as a combo guard. This is not a knock on Kidd; the Mavs could not have won without his defense on Wade, clutch shot making, and excellent passing, but Kidd wasn't a true pg in the way that Chris Paul or Steve Nash or Rajon Rondo are.

Memphis Madness
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2011
Posts: 3567
Points: -1245
Offline
The Mavs featured one of the

The Mavs featured one of the top five players in the game (easily). Kidd is one of the best pass-first, creating point guards out there. The Heat had two of the other top five players in the league, neither of them a point guard. Derrick Rose is a top five player but his team lost to the Heat even though the Bulls had just as many scoring options and a supposedly deeper bench.

Rose, Westbrook, Deron Williams, and Chris Paul are all top five point guards. I don't see Kyrie Irving being on their level. I am not even sure that he will be the best point guard in the draft. Knight, Jimmer, Kemba, and Rubio are all right there and should all be above average (but not HOF-caliber) point guards right there with Irving.

Chad Ford has the Cavs taking Kyrie Irving at number 1, but then Williams and Kanter going off the board at 2 and 3, so the Cavs end up with Brandon Knight at 4 which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. But, in my opinion, Williams and Kanter are the best two prospects with those point guards along with Vesely being the next best prospects.

NYK2010
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 2462
Points: 1498
Offline
Bulls had just as many

Bulls had just as many scoring options as the Heat, yeah rite what games were you watching.

Boozer isn't the same player was a few years ago even. Deng is no where near Lebron. Noah isn't an offensive player just because he can handle the ball and pass doesn't mean he's a threat to score.

Kyle Korver is a shooter and his shot wasn't falling, Gibson and the rest of the bench is better than Miami's but your bench player's don't usually decide the series. I know Jason Terry was the exception but he gets starter minutes and plays with the game on the line.

PulseGlazer
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2011
Posts: 1281
Points: 1906
Offline
Great players put together

Great players put together intelligently win titles. In the 80s you could make a case that top guards were key as the titles went from Magic to Zeke to MJ... then Hakeem won! Oh! Centers are dominant, and the same meme came up when Shaq won. You can put together a winning combination around most great players. That can include a point, bigs and anything else. There is no one success formula.

cward23
Registered User
Joined: 04/16/2011
Posts: 617
Points: 170
Offline
That makes no sense since PF

That makes no sense since PF and Centers and Wing players have been drafted high to bad teams and everntually won titiles. Its more likely that you win a title with a superstar wing, big man then a superstar point guard

aamir543
aamir543's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/11/2009
Posts: 5063
Points: 5542
Offline
Yeah, Cward is right. To

Yeah, Cward is right. To contend, you need a decent point, but the stats show that dating back to the late 90s and 80s, no elite point guard has won a tittle. The best have been Chauncy Buillups and Tony Parker, and both were in their prime. Chauncey was scoring 17 and getting 6 dimes. Parker's best championship year was in 07, when he got 19 and 5.5. These are very good and respectable numbers, but neither superstar like CP3, or D Will, or D Rose. And Rondo was not an all star yet in 08, Gary Payton was over the hill in 06, Kidd is still solid, but not his 02 or 03 form. Then you have the solid points of the Bulls. Not spectacular, but good none the less. Avery Johnson wont win a tittle by himself, then yolu have D Fish, a good 10-12 points and 3-4 dimes. Then Parker, and Billups, then White chocolate, who at that point was good for 12 and 5, followed by Parker once again, then Rondo early in his career, then an aging D Fish, and an aging J Kidd. Now tons of elite points have lost championships, since Isiah and the bad boys went back to back, we have not had an elite point win a tittle. Allen Iverson, Gary Payton, J Kidd, Rondo last year, and John Stokcton. So i believe that to win a championship, you need solid depth, an amazing do it all star, good pieces around him who know their role, and a solid point who can manage the game. If J Kidd was on that Miami team when they had the 15 point lead in game two, that game would have been over.

Grandmama
Grandmama's picture
Registered User
Joined: 09/20/2009
Posts: 2237
Points: 4308
Offline
I hear what you're saying.

I hear what you're saying. IMO if I want a superstar to build a franchise around, the PG position is the last position I would want my superstar to play. It's been proven from past champions that dominant centers win championships, so a superstar center would be my first choice in position. Second has to be a dominant shooting guard. If you look at the last 20 years, you will see 11/20 ships won by Jordan and Kobe combined. Either give me a dominant center, or dominant shooting guard. If I was given a choice of a superstar, this is the order of which position I would want the star to play.

1. Center (Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan) big men win

2. Shooting Guard

3. Power Forward

4. Small Forward

5. Point Guard

ItsVictorOladipo
ItsVictorOladipo's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/11/2009
Posts: 2054
Points: 4750
Offline
I hear what you're saying.

I hear what you're saying. IMO if I want a superstar to build a franchise around, the PG position is the last position I would want my superstar to play. It's been proven from past champions that dominant centers win championships, so a superstar center would be my first choice in position. Second has to be a dominant shooting guard. If you look at the last 20 years, you will see 11/20 ships won by Jordan and Kobe combined. Either give me a dominant center, or dominant shooting guard. If I was given a choice of a superstar, this is the order of which position I would want the star to play.

1. Center (Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Shaq, Olajuwon, Robinson, Duncan) big men win

2. Shooting Guard

3. Power Forward

4. Small Forward

5. Point Guard

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree with you about centers being the integral part in many championship teams and guys like Moses Malone, Willis Reed, Dave Cowens, Wes Unseld and Bill Walton can be added to that list. In fact on my list of the 12 centers of all time Patrick Ewing is the only one that has not won a championship while playing at the top of his game.

However I don't see that necessarily as a trend with shooting guards. Sure it works with the two greatest; Kobe and MJ but they are also arguably 2 of the five greatest players in NBA history. Other great SGs like Gervin, Iverson, Pistol Pete and Reggie Miller never won a championship and others like Clyde Drexler, Wade and Jerry West could only win one championship in a season when they were paired with a Hall of Fame center.

In a 12 year period from 1979 to 1990, 8 championships were won by teams led by point guards (Magic with 5, Ike with 2 and Gus Williams and the Supersonics with 1). We always try to see patterns in everything instead of looking at each championship on its own individual basis.

Really besides center no other position has a proven track record of being the second most important piece to a championship team.

PulseGlazer
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2011
Posts: 1281
Points: 1906
Offline
I don't recall - what

I don't recall - what dominant 4's have been #1 options on champions? Duncan is a 5, so spare me. Where are all the dominant 3s winning titles? Pierce was part of a big 3, Pippen was a clear #2... yet Jordan won nothing until he got the right 3. Pierce won nothing until he got the right players around him. Centers are basically the only position in which a great player guarantees you a shot (Mitch Richmond and Latrell Spreewell say hi SG position).

It takes, in every case, a well-built team. Can that team be extremely well-built around a PG? Sure, Magic and Zeke proved that. Besides Ben, Chauncey might have been the most indespensible player on his title team.

It's easy to argue PG's aren't relevant, but that's really limiting your sample due to recent dynasties. The Kobe/Shaq Lakers and Jordan/Pippen Bulls both used the same system - a system which was predicated around not needing a 1. Look around them, though:

Tony Parker is an All Star caliber player. Rondo wasn't there yet, but was very good. According to advanced metrics, Chauncey was an MVP candidate. Taking many of the Rockets big shots was Sam Cassell. Then look at the major challengers to the Lakers and Bulls - Bibby when he was all world on Sacto, Payton, Kidd with several finals, Stockton giving the Bulls their big challenge. Of course, at the same time, Indiana with an old Mark Jackson was competing, as was Portland with old Rod Strickland. Magic and Terry Porter likewise faced Jordan's Bulls, as did All Star Kevin Johnson.

There are a lot of ways to succeed in building a great team if you know what you're doing. Nothing, apparently except Phil Jackson with prime of life All-Time greats guarantees a title over the past 20 years. (The Rockets and Spurs are the other wildly successful team of All Time and, as previously stated, a great Center is the exception that guarantees contention. Orlando from a few years ago says "hi" on this front as well).

PulseGlazer
Registered User
Joined: 06/12/2011
Posts: 1281
Points: 1906
Offline
ItsDwight - my new favorite

ItsDwight - my new favorite poster. Same exact idea I was trying to get accross. Well played.

RSS: Syndicate content