share

Pure Point Guard Myth

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
Pure Point Guard Myth

One thing that really irks me is that everyone seems to think that top "pure" point guards are the right way to go to win games. Now, I'm going to make an argument many of you will disagree with but here me out.

If I was a GM, I in no way would want Chris Paul on my team.

Now do not get me wrong, I love watching CP3 and I think he can be VERY valuable for a team. However, a top flight "pure" point guard such as himself ties up a lot of money. And in my honest opinion the PG position is nowhere near as important as it used to be, and i Would not give a PG like him a max (or close to it) contract.

The NBA has evolved into an iso-league. Guys who make a living by getting others involved are becoming less and less important as the years go by.

Basically, what I'm saying is I would not want my PG to be the face of my franchise. To win in this league you need one of 2 things: A bigger guard/forward who can get to the hoop on iso's and a big man that can play defense and has a good post offense.

Investing a lot of money into a PG is not ideal for a franchise.

If I were running a franchise I would look for a PG that does a little bit of everything:
A) Cannot be a liability on Defense
--Guys like Derek Fisher or Jason Kidd(now) wouldn't cut it
B) Needs to be at least an average shooter
--Guys like Earl Watson, Rodney Stuckey wouldn't cut it
C) Needs to be big, physical, and get to the hoop
--Guys like Chris Paul, Darren Collison wouldn't cut it
D) Cannot be turnover prone
--Preferrably under about 2.5 TO per game
E) Needs to be a leader, but understands his role in the offense is not being the main guy

If I was starting a team, I would want a guy like Jameer Nelson, Russell Westbrook, or Chauncey Billups.

These are guys that do a little bit of everything, and would not require a high price tag.

Save the $$ for the big man and the big-time iso-guy. Don't lock up you're "pure" Point Guard who has a &$#%#&@!-ton of assists because this league isn't about assists anymore. It's about taking guys one on one. If you can't do that, then you can't win.


knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
I like this post a lot, very

I like this post a lot, very informative. May I ask why you do not put Derrick Rose's name as a guy you would want??

fastdan
Registered User
Joined: 06/10/2009
Posts: 743
Points: 873
Offline
You just said one of the

You just said one of the criteria is a guy who is big and can get to the hoop..Jameer Nelson is 5'11 and gets to the line less then twice a game.

You said you need a guy who can shoot and not turn it over, but Westbrook shoots like 25% from the 3, and turns it over 3.3 times a game.

You don't want Chris Paul because he gets too many assists? He still scores like 20 points a game at extremely good efficiency.

sheltwon3
sheltwon3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 6364
Points: 2607
Offline
Chris Paul deserves his

Chris Paul deserves his money. There are really only two main important positions to every basketball team and that is point guard and Center. Those positions should be getting the most money. Now that Paul has a good back up he should not have to carry the Hornets and get hurt like he does but when he is Healthy, he is worth his money and more. Same with D Rose. Dude is a beast in the playoffs and is carrying his team in his second year. There are some players that do not deserve their money but Chris Paul is not one of them.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8307
Points: 11859
Offline
Chris Paul can take over a

Chris Paul can take over a game if he chooses to.

sheltwon3
sheltwon3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 6364
Points: 2607
Offline
i will say this there were

i will say this there were better teams when all these players were not getting huge contracts. A lot of team now are formed out of neccessity and not out of need. Some teams like Atlanta and Charlotte get lucky when a team like GSW gives up top talent at the 2 guard and 3 spot for virtually nothing but to dump cash because GSW signed Maggette who they did not need or want now but are stuck with. They had the assets to have a complete team but they let money dictate how their team would be.

Penny Jr.
Registered User
Joined: 02/05/2010
Posts: 308
Points: 282
Offline
Disagree wit da post i

Disagree wit da post i really dont have 2 speak cuz
the first 2 comments took the words rite out my mouth
oh and i see where u comin from cuz a pure point
hasnt won a title in a while.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
Knicks Fan- I did not put

Knicks Fan- I did not put Rose on their simply because the hype behind him. The hype behind him alone will cause him to cost more money than I believe he is worth.

FastDan- Not everyone is going to fit the criteria perfectly. There aren't many PG's, if there are at all, that fit my criteria to perfection. I'm looking for guys who are close.

Jameer Nelson does not get to the line a lot, and he is short. But he is bigger(stronger) and doesn't get bullied. His lack of getting to the line is something I'd be able to live with.

In the case of Westbrook, by shooting I did not mean only 3PT shooting. Westbrook has a solid mid range game, and is he was my PG I would make sure I had a SG or SF that could shoot the 3 so this was not a liability. And in terms of his turnovers, I believe that as he gets older he will cut back on stupid turnovers. I don't tihnk he will ever get below 2.5 but I can see him getting to the 2.5-3.0 turnover game, which as I said with Nelson is something I can live with.

I don't want Chris Paul because of the $$$$$ it costs to keep him around. He's very efficient and as I said can be VERY valuable to a team on the court, but financially I believe he harms them more than his on the court play helps them.

This league is about iso-play and in my opinion all those assists don't count for THAT much. Get yourself a PG who can do a little bit of everything, plays good defense, and save the money for the guys who really win games- The big men and the bigger guards-forwards that can take it to the hoop.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11925
Points: 11807
Offline
i think that you dont need a

i think that you dont need a "pure" pg and those guys you listed are all capable of running a winning team. However Chris Paul is the best pg in the league in my book. I take him any day of the week and dont hesitate.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
I would take CP3 on my team

I would take CP3 on my team in an instant... If his contract was under 10Mil.. I don't think I would pay more than 10Mil for a PG. And he'd have to be a special PG for the 10 Mil

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
To me the salary cap should

To me the salary cap should either be raised, or the players should be paid less. The second one I prefer, by a lot. To me very very few players in this league are "top dollar." 10-20 players I would say.

mgreener_34
mgreener_34's picture
Registered User
Joined: 01/06/2010
Posts: 567
Points: 1106
Offline
So your main argument is

So your main argument is more based off of the salary then off of the players? The way I see it is that pure point guards get other players involved more, and don't tie up the offensive end. Look at Tyreke Evans, he always has the ball in his hands and is the go to guy, so when he starts jacking up shots the offense stops and people loose momentum. Players like Paul (and Williams for that matter) can score in bunches, but also keep everyone happy at the same time. Just because the price may be to high doesn't mean they aren't worth it. Paul, Williams, and Billups have all let their teams deep into the playoffs without a good SG.

Meditated States
Meditated States's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/29/2009
Posts: 2807
Points: 587
Offline
Rajon Rondo

Jameer come on he is small. Jameer is not a good defender either. Rondo or D Will. Rondo=Defense, athletiscm, high iq,unselfish. Check his TO's too. Only had 2 tonight to go against his 12 dimes and 4 steals. pass 1st and get other guys their shots in the best spots.

fastdan
Registered User
Joined: 06/10/2009
Posts: 743
Points: 873
Offline
Derek Fisher has 4 rings,

Derek Fisher has 4 rings, Rondo has 1, Jason williams has 1, Avery Johnson has 1...These guys would be considered pure points and don't really fit your criteria, but have shown they can help a team win.

I see what you mean though with putting in a lot of money in your PG. With all those teams those mentioned players have won with there has always been an allstar bigman and an allstar wing player. Point guards with outstanding numbers have not always translated in rings...Marbury, Iverson, Payton...if I was a GM with a clean slate I would invest the third most amount in a pg, after a C and a scoring 2 or 3, but I would also not shy away from a guy like CP3, because he CAN iso, as well as get other guys to score easier.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11925
Points: 11807
Offline
to me, there are 3 or 4 pg's

to me, there are 3 or 4 pg's i would have no problem paying over 10 million to right now:

Chris Paul, Derrick Rose and Deron Willimas for sure. I might add Arenas to this as well because i personally still believe he will come back strong.

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
llperez, Arenas over $10mil

llperez, Arenas over $10mil I just don't see him as a beneficial player to the team cause. He will put people in the seats, but he's just not a winner in my mind and is not worth being paid over $10 mil a year. The other 3 I agree with.

raptors12345
Registered User
Joined: 04/23/2010
Posts: 3
Points: 113
Offline
his contract is close to

his contract is close to $20mil per year

raptors12345
Registered User
Joined: 04/23/2010
Posts: 3
Points: 113
Offline
talking about gilbert

talking about gilbert getting $20 mil

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11925
Points: 11807
Offline
knicksfan, i expect a lot of

knicksfan, i expect a lot of people to question arenas and im not even sure if im right about him, but he was absolutely the leader when they were playing in the playoffs and battling the cavs. He is a go to player that can go off and i truly expect him to learn form this experiance and become more of a leader and cut the crap. He is not a typical pg, but he can still be an all-star in this league and take over games.

fastdan
Registered User
Joined: 06/10/2009
Posts: 743
Points: 873
Offline
CP3 and Dwill are set to

CP3 and Dwill are set to make about an average of 15.5 mill over the next two years.

Gilbert is to make about 20mil/year for the next 4 years.

I can't decide if SpencerisHawsome2 is trying to debate about pure point guards or salary management....

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
fastdan, I think he is

fastdan,

I think he is debating both. With the salary cap and max contracts and the way things work, you can't mess up in the Draft. To me salary management is the most important thing after winning games of course.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
I initally was simply going

I initally was simply going to debate about pure PGs but i kinda dipped into both lol.. Basically PG's that are considered "pure" PGs rack up assists which leads to bigger contracts-which makes them overpaid.

And I don't consider Derek Fisher a pure PG.. A Pure PG is a guy who has the ball in his hands a lot, and is constantly finding guys cutting or open for shots, conseuqently racking up assists.

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
I agree with you on the

I agree with you on the money aspect to me the only guys worth a max contract are the super stars like Lebron, Kobe, Wade, Durant, etc. I would love to have Chris Paul on me team, but with the way the NBA salary cap is I would not want to give him big money b/c u need other players.

Biggysmalls
Registered User
Joined: 12/20/2009
Posts: 711
Points: 1196
Offline
How are assists not

How are assists not important??? Isnt one of the best signs of a good basketball team sharing the ball? The NBA isnt driven by Iso's...The Cavs, Heat, and sometimes the Lakers are. Those are good teams, but even they have guys who can pass. Assists are pretty darn important in my book

I agree with your point that it is a heavy one on one league now, and that alot of offense is predicated on beating poeple off the dribble...but what happens when teams who actually play defense, dedicate help side? think about it...BINGO, an assist!! Its really simple basketball, draw defenders and pass for an open shot. Theres no such thing as taking a guy one on one, because in all reality, if a team is good, they have help side defense...thats where all those assists matter.

I think the best point guards are the ones who A. Control tempo B. get others easy baskets C. Maintain control on the floor.

I'm not a fan of the ball dominant point guards, but to say that a Point guard is expendable is just not a smart statement.

knicksfan7
Registered User
Joined: 06/18/2009
Posts: 3069
Points: 1488
Offline
To me the only expendable

To me the only expendable position in the whole league is the PF position.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
In a certain day and age,

In a certain day and age, PG's were easily either the 1st or 2nd most important position on a team. The way the game has evolved, it's not so much anymore.

It's hard to compare to any other sport but I guess I'll try and compare it to football. Giving huge money out to a PG is kind of like giving out huge money to your RB's right now in the NFL. The NFL is evolving into a pass-friendly league and teams often use multiple running backs.

It'd be smart to give big money to your LT, your QB, and a couple WR's.

The way the NFL used to work was by managing the clock and running the ball, but that is a thing of the past. Now, spending big money on your running backs is pointless as they're not as important as they once were.

Actually, now that I think about it it is a very easy comparison. New rules have come along that made it easier for WR's in the NFL-- Defensive Backs get penalized a lot more for things than they used too, making it tougher to cover WR's, which means passing is the way to go.

As for the NBA.. Handcheck rules and petty fouls are called more than they used to be, making it easier for guys who play 1 on 1 ISO style or big men in the paint. PG's used to be needed to find the open guys since the D could play more physical. However, with the new rules and the way the game has evolved PG's are less important to a team.

So I guess to sum up my argument (in it's entirety I'm kinda goin all over the place here)

The protoypical PG is no longer what I would want from my PG. And in no way would I want to pay big money for my PG (unless he was someone really special)

Biggysmalls
Registered User
Joined: 12/20/2009
Posts: 711
Points: 1196
Offline
The point guard compares to

The point guard compares to the Runningbacks? Lol.

If anything the NBA is becoming a more PG driven league. Point guards are in more control of the offense than they ever were. I'd say more teams run their offense through their point guards then Posts, and even wings.

I'd say PG's are like the LT and the posts would be the power back, the wings are my 2rd down back/kick returner. The bench is the pass rush, and the Twolves are the Buffalo Bills. It hurts so bad to compare my beloved Twolves with the lowly Buffalo Bills, but it is true.

apb540
apb540's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/08/2009
Posts: 2324
Points: 1811
Offline
Pure PG

Your telling me a team with a nucleus such as CP3 and Bosh wouldn't be able to compete for a title?

sheltwon3
sheltwon3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/30/2009
Posts: 6364
Points: 2607
Offline
saying Chris Paul does not

saying Chris Paul does not deserve his money is like saying Lebron does not deserve his money. Some players deserve their money and some dont. Trying to just put that on a position come on. You would have gotten my attention if you said a center or power forward that can not dominate in the paint should not get paid over 7 million. what about shooting guard if your name is not Kobe 10 millions is too much for you.

wesleymatthews23
wesleymatthews23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/17/2010
Posts: 326
Points: -25
Offline
Okay here's your problem. A

Okay here's your problem. A pure point guard is the way to go. You do not have to spend a ton of money on that point but he still needs to be pure. Why:
1 If he is not, he is too much of a ball hog, and will never pass to your big man or big guard who may happen to be your star player! That star player would not be very happy, and one of those two would not last very long on that team. 2 No one likes watching a ball hog play.(Kobe and Lebron are a special case, because of their creativeness) Yeah it is amazing watching him make all those moves, find all those ways to score but after awhile it just gets boring as a fan and you want to see someone else get involved. This is especially true if your point guard is not that good but still not a pure point. (I dont know about you but I dont to watch Derrick Rose wow me time and time again when they also have Noah, and Deng who can play too. Yes, Rose is good but he is not that good(he is no Lebron or Kobe)
If he is then no ball hog, everyone gets their fair share of points, everyone is happy, you win games. Look at the Jazz. Dwill is the pure point guard, and that team excels at any level. They can beat any team. (You may disagree, but they beat the Cavs, Lakers, Magic, Nuggets, and Mavs during the regular season. They did not beat the Hawks during the season but if you put those 2 together in the playoffs or even next season, the Jazz would still win, no team change of course) They can do this even when they are undermanned. They are undermanned right now against the Nuggets yet they lead the series 3-1. You don't see the Bulls doing that do you. When Noah went out mid season that team fell apart. The Jazz could have done the same when Memo went down, but then Fesenko arose from the dust all because of the inspired play of Williams and Booz.

You do not need to spend all your money on your pure point guard but you do need to have a pure point guard if you want to win!

BasketBalAllan
BasketBalAllan's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/20/2009
Posts: 1113
Points: 3382
Offline
When someone says "Pure PG"

When someone says "Pure PG" to me, I think of a player who is not quite big enough to play SG, is a great floor leader, and extremely good at handling the ball and making good decisions, but it does not necessarily tell me about the other aspects of the player, such as his defense or his ability to make crucial shots. This to me is what set Paul apart from other pure PG's. He is great at almost every facet of the game, I think that he definitely is deserving of his money.

The thing is though, to have a winning team in the NBA these days, it almost seems as if you have to be way over cap, or have a couple guys playing way beyond their pay-grade. There seems to be a system set up that teams will give a good player a huge amount of money, just because they do not want to lose their best player, and that will in turn hurt the team in terms of acquiring other talent to actually put together a winning team. There is no team to most of these players anymore; sure they will pass and high-five and chest-bump, but when it comes to contract negotiations they suddenly get distracted by all the zeros, instead of taking one for the team, so that they can actually have a team. I think that there needs to be a better structure of how much you can actually pay a player based on how long they have been in the league, and maybe even based a little bit on their previous contract (if the contract was over a certain amount to begin with).

joecheck88
joecheck88's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 2768
Points: 2565
Offline
so why so many point guards

so why so many point guards taken last year? why is a guy like eric bledsoe getting mention in some lottery talk? i dont agree with the post at all. cp3s team a few years ago wasnt that talented but they were very good. i mean david west is his second best player and when healthy he takes them to the playoffs in the west. look at the pgs on the playoff teams. rondo, rose, d williams, westbrook, jennings, nash, billups, parker, kidd. these are all guys that without them they are fringe playoff teams or worse. point guards are very important. ya u would rather pay jordan, kobe, lebron, shaq or hakeem but they dont come around often. but wouldnt you take stockton, payton, kevin johnson if you couldnt get the other guys? atleast you have a chance with these guys.

Tongue-Out-Like-23
Tongue-Out-Like-23's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/16/2010
Posts: 8307
Points: 11859
Offline
True PG hasn't won a title

True PG hasn't won a title in a while? Uhh... Rajon Rondo? Maybe Chauncey Billups and Tony Parker... Hmm, That's 4 championships in 6 years.

joecheck88
joecheck88's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 2768
Points: 2565
Offline
D3WadeIsBetta

Exactly, and Parker and billups were Finals MVP's.

apb540
apb540's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/08/2009
Posts: 2324
Points: 1811
Offline
yea

Let's put this to rest and just declare that any player is worth the money if he deserves it, regardless of position.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
When was the last time that

When was the last time that a team who's face of their franchise was a PG won the championship?

Yeah obviously guys like Parker and Billups and Rondo have won championships a lot recently. That's the case I am making though. I'd rather pay ok money for these guys then big money for CP3 or DWill because I just do not think the PG position is the most important as many people think.

joecheck88
joecheck88's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 2768
Points: 2565
Offline
but parker, billups and

but parker, billups and rondo make more than ok money. they arent max players but are all over 10mil a season.

SpencerIsHawesome2
SpencerIsHawesome2's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 899
Points: 1022
Offline
I'm curious as to what they

I'm curious as to what they made the years they won the championship.

Hale
Hale's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/08/2009
Posts: 5935
Points: 12822
Offline
I'd pay D-Rose over ten mil

I'd pay D-Rose over ten mil a year for the next 10-12 years without thinking twice about it, that is just me. Dudes gonna be special.

dolla130
Registered User
Joined: 05/09/2009
Posts: 514
Points: 432
Offline
as of right now there are

as of right now there are only 3 pgs worth the money they get or will get and thats D.Will, CP3 and D.Rose and that comment about how rose's hype would make him cost more then he is worth is bull because he is excelling past the hype in his 2nd season

RSS: Syndicate content