Does the PG position really matter?

[pauls931]

Looking at the way many teams play these days, there's few PGs that actually try to run offenses/distribute the ball. The few I can think of are.

Nash
CP3
Deron

All the other PGs shoot/drive every chance they get.

Now here's what's funny, I did not look at any stats, and just now looked at the assist leaders in the NBA in 2009.

#1 CP3
#2 Deron
#3 Nash (despite running in bastard offense)

There's a few others close, but after that the assist numbers drop way down.


Now you have to consider some of the most successful teams recently.

Bulls Dynasty, no PG
Spurs close, but Parker is a scorer.
Lakers, no PG, Fisher blows
Houston, what PG? I remeber Hakeem and a bunch of shooters.

Also consider, stockton - no rings.

Magic Johnson is close, probably the best combination of PG and Scoring to date. But, he also may be responsible for the bastardization of the position making scoring as a PG glamorous.

[XFactor]

What about Isiah Thomas, Bob Cousy, Oscar Robertson, Tiny Archibald (He was a good distributor in his first part of his career but never won a ring until he went with the Celtics as a washed down player)

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Since the Isiah Thomas Pistons, there hasn't been a single PG oriented team to win a championship, and very few have made the finals. Now you know why I want the Suns to stop building around Steve Nash.

[pauls931]

What about Isiah Thomas, Bob Cousy, Oscar Robertson, Tiny Archibald (He was a good distributor in his first part of his career but never won a ring until he went with the Celtics as a washed down player)

I was thinking moden era, but Isiah is definitely a winning PG and a good catch. Forgot about him.

[iggypop123]

thomas was the last pg although he was a scorer to win a title being his team. that was 20 yrs ago

[XFactor]

thomas was the last pg although he was a scorer to win a title being his team. that was 20 yrs ago

Billups did it in 04 but he was more of a scorer and less of a distributor.

[mojorizen7]

Since the Isiah Thomas Pistons, there hasn't been a single PG oriented team to win a championship, and very few have made the finals. Now you know why I want the Suns to stop building around Steve Nash.

+1
If you want to win a championship you build a team around either a dominant big man(D.Howard,Duncan,Shaq,Ewing,Olajuwon etc...) or an all-universe playmaker/scorer(LeBron,Kobe,MJ,Magic,Bird etc...).

Not all of those teams won a title(some not yet) but outside of Magic(who was obviously NOT the prototypical PG) and Isiah Thomas(who's teams won titles with a philosophy instead of a superstar) what has the elite PG done in terms of winning titles in the modern era?

Off the top 'o my noggin:

Mark Price
KJ
Tim Hardaway
Gary Payton(coat-tail champ w/Miami,his great Seattle teams never got one)
Stockton
Jason Kidd
Steve Nash
Chris Paul
Derron Williams



Nada.

[XFactor]

+1
If you want to win a championship you build a team around either a dominant big man(D.Howard,Duncan,Shaq,Ewing,Olajuwon etc...) or an all-universe playmaker/scorer(LeBron,Kobe,MJ,Magic,Bird etc...).

Not all of those teams won a title(some not yet) but outside of Magic(who was obviously NOT the prototypical PG) and Isiah Thomas(who's teams won titles with a philosophy instead of a superstar) what has the elite PG done in terms of winning titles in the modern era?

Off the top 'o my noggin:

Mark Price
KJ
Tim Hardaway
Gary Payton(coat-tail champ w/Miami,his great Seattle teams never got one)
Stockton
Jason Kidd
Steve Nash
Chris Paul
Derron Williams



Nada.


Billups did it in 04 but he was more of a scorer and less of a distributor.

[mojorizen7]

Were the' 04 PISTONS built around Chauncey Billups and/or his skills?

It isn't irony that the exception has been a team who(IMO) are built upon a philosophy rather than a dominant player......maybe some of the Detroit faithful can comment on that.
Regardless,the OP argument holds water. History says so.

[JamStone]

Sure the point guard position matters. But, the degree of importance varies from team to team just like any other position. If you have a team with solid players at every position who can all score, rebound, defend, but none of them are really great playmakers who can break defenses on their own and they need help getting in scoring position, then a great point guard would fit that team really well. If a team has a player like a LeBron or Kobe or Dirk who can help create offense by themselves at a different position other than point guard, then having a great point guard is not as necessary.

Championship greatness isn't dependent on a particular position. It helps just having great players period, regardless of position. At one point, it was thought that a championship couldn't be won without a dominant scoring big man. But then teams like the 80s Celtics, the Bad Boy Pistons, the Jordan Bulls won without dominant scoring big men. They had solid big men, some all star big men, but not the Wilts and Kareems. Then it was thought that a team couldn't win it all without at least two all star caliber players, then Hakeem's Rockets (no offense Otis Thorpe) won with him basically carrying the team all by himself (at least for their first title). Then it was viewed that a team couldn't win without a transcendent superstar leading the way and the 2004 Detroit Pistons won it all.

There are general philosophies on how to win in the NBA that hold true most of the time, but there are always exceptions. Dwight Howard is probably one of the top 2-3 dominant centers in the league of the last few years. But, I'm still taking LeBron or Kobe over him.

It also depends on the competition throughout the league at the time. Take for example those Bad Boy Pistons of the late 80s. They became a dominant team that won a couple of championships right as Magic and the Showtime Lakers and Larry Bird's Celtics were getting older and right before Michael Jordan started to dominate the league. They had a perfect but short window where they ended up winning a couple titles. It wasn't just about Isiah being the star of that team and being a point guard. It was peaking collectively as a team at the right time in that era of NBA basketball.

The point guard isn't less important in today's NBA than it was any other era. It's still a very important position. The thing with the point guard position now though is that the traditional responsibilities of the point guard have changed. Now shooting guards and small forwards and power forwards and even some centers facilitate and run the offense. Kobe and LeBron change the point guard position for their respective teams because they do many of the things the point guard should be doing. But, not every team has a Kobe or LeBron.

It's not about whether a great point guard is necessary to win or to build a championship level team around. It's just about having great talented players at as many positions possible and having just the right mix of players to build around. Having a great point guard doesn't necessarily mean a team can build around that point guard to be championship caliber. But I don't think having a great point guard precludes a team from being a true championship caliber team either. It takes great players regardless of position.

[Darthkiller]

Sure the point guard position matters. But, the degree of importance varies from team to team just like any other position. If you have a team with solid players at every position who can all score, rebound, defend, but none of them are really great playmakers who can break defenses on their own and they need help getting in scoring position, then a great point guard would fit that team really well. If a team has a player like a LeBron or Kobe or Dirk who can help create offense by themselves at a different position other than point guard, then having a great point guard is not as necessary.

Championship greatness isn't dependent on a particular position. It helps just having great players period, regardless of position. At one point, it was thought that a championship couldn't be won without a dominant scoring big man. But then teams like the 80s Celtics, the Bad Boy Pistons, the Jordan Bulls won without dominant scoring big men. They had solid big men, some all star big men, but not the Wilts and Kareems. Then it was thought that a team couldn't win it all without at least two all star caliber players, then Hakeem's Rockets (no offense Otis Thorpe) won with him basically carrying the team all by himself (at least for their first title). Then it was viewed that a team couldn't win without a transcendent superstar leading the way and the 2004 Detroit Pistons won it all.

There are general philosophies on how to win in the NBA that hold true most of the time, but there are always exceptions. Dwight Howard is probably one of the top 2-3 dominant centers in the league of the last few years. But, I'm still taking LeBron or Kobe over him.

It also depends on the competition throughout the league at the time. Take for example those Bad Boy Pistons of the late 80s. They became a dominant team that won a couple of championships right as Magic and the Showtime Lakers and Larry Bird's Celtics were getting older and right before Michael Jordan started to dominate the league. They had a perfect but short window where they ended up winning a couple titles. It wasn't just about Isiah being the star of that team and being a point guard. It was peaking collectively as a team at the right time in that era of NBA basketball.

The point guard isn't less important in today's NBA than it was any other era. It's still a very important position. The thing with the point guard position now though is that the traditional responsibilities of the point guard have changed. Now shooting guards and small forwards and power forwards and even some centers facilitate and run the offense. Kobe and LeBron change the point guard position for their respective teams because they do many of the things the point guard should be doing. But, not every team has a Kobe or LeBron.

It's not about whether a great point guard is necessary to win or to build a championship level team around. It's just about having great talented players at as many positions possible and having just the right mix of players to build around. Having a great point guard doesn't necessarily mean a team can build around that point guard to be championship caliber. But I don't think having a great point guard precludes a team from being a true championship caliber team either. It takes great players regardless of position.


wtf. 80s celtcis had the best frontcourt in nba history.

[Bob Lanier]

Were the' 04 PISTONS built around Chauncey Billups and/or his skills?
No. Billups scored well in the 2004 Finals because neither Gary Payton nor Shaquille O'Neal was interested in defending the pick-and-roll, giving him open 15-foot jumpers any time he wanted one. But Billups was not nearly talented or efficient enough for the Pistons to be "built around" his offensive game, and indeed the Pistons never tried until Flip Saunders' tenure. In 2004 the Pistons were "built around" defense, i.e. Ben and Rasheed Wallace, with Tayshaun Prince still useful on that end because Dallas and Phoenix's owners hadn't yet convinced the NBA to ban hand-checking; their offense was based around baseline screens for Rip Hamilton.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

No. Billups scored well in the 2004 Finals because neither Gary Payton nor Shaquille O'Neal was interested in defending the pick-and-roll, giving him open 15-foot jumpers any time he wanted one. But Billups was not nearly talented or efficient enough for the Pistons to be "built around" his offensive game, and indeed the Pistons never tried until Flip Saunders' tenure. In 2004 the Pistons were "built around" defense, i.e. Ben and Rasheed Wallace, with Tayshaun Prince still useful on that end because Dallas and Phoenix's owners hadn't yet convinced the NBA to ban hand-checking; their offense was based around baseline screens for Rip Hamilton.


This. The 2004 Pistons were anything but a PG oriented team. There was no offensive pecking order on the team (or "go to" player if you will), it was built on a great team defense and an unselfish offense. Btw Bob Lanier great fuckin sig.

[mogrovejo]

Rondo is probably the most distributor oriented PG in the league right now. And he's top 3 in total assists and Assist%.

I agree with JamStone (except that the '80 Celtics didn't have an elite big man..wtf?), of course you can win a championship building around a great PG, be him more passing or scoring oriented.

[mogrovejo]

In a related note, I think the classic PG as we know today, that acts like the team's quarter-back and shoulders almost all playmaking responsibility will be a thing of the past in the more or less near future. Just like the perimeter jump-shooting big was a rarity 10 years ago and pretty much a dominant position/skill-set today, I think the backcourt will evolve from the classic 1pg-2wings (the SG/SF distinction doesn't make sense any more for most teams) to a 3 hybrid guards line-up.

[mojorizen7]

Great posts and opinions in this thread. Still, if i'm the GM and i'm building something from the ground up, i'm not building around an elite PG.
A 6'2" man with extraordinary skills can only get you so far IMO(a general statement and prob biased bcuz of all the elite PG's we've been blessed w/here in PHX with only 1 Finals appearance since 1980) but thats my take.

I admit I've always been a little bit of a closet PISTONS fan because of the manner in which they approach chasing titles.

[JamStone]

I said dominant scoring big man the likes of Wilt or Kareem, not just elite or all star. Yes they had McHale and Parish. But I don't put them in the category of Wilt or Kareem.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Great post, Jamstone. :tu


Looking at the way many teams play these days, there's few PGs that actually try to run offenses/distribute the ball. The few I can think of are.

Nash
CP3
Deron

All the other PGs shoot/drive every chance they get.

Now here's what's funny, I did not look at any stats, and just now looked at the assist leaders in the NBA in 2009.

#1 CP3
#2 Deron
#3 Nash (despite running in bastard offense)

There's a few others close, but after that the assist numbers drop way down.


Steve Nash , PHX
37 33.6 417 11.3 146 3.9 16.1 2.86
2
Chris Paul , NOH
26 37.6 282 10.8 61 2.3 13.8 4.62
3
Deron Williams , UTA
32 38.1 312 9.8 109 3.4 12.3 2.86
4
Rajon Rondo , BOS
33 35.8 316 9.6 95 2.9 12.8 3.33
5
Jason Kidd , DAL
36 35.8 317 8.8 81 2.2 11.8 3.91

Rondo should have been included in that list, and he is a true point. And Kidd, another true point, is 5th.

[DaDakota]

It depends upon the makeup of the rest of your team.

There is no "one way to do it" anymore.....

There are lots of ways to do it...scoring point, distribution point, defensive point....

Depends upon who else you have on the team.

DD

[pauls931]

Great post, Jamstone. :tu




Steve Nash , PHX
37 33.6 417 11.3 146 3.9 16.1 2.86
2
Chris Paul , NOH
26 37.6 282 10.8 61 2.3 13.8 4.62
3
Deron Williams , UTA
32 38.1 312 9.8 109 3.4 12.3 2.86
4
Rajon Rondo , BOS
33 35.8 316 9.6 95 2.9 12.8 3.33
5
Jason Kidd , DAL
36 35.8 317 8.8 81 2.2 11.8 3.91

Rondo should have been included in that list, and he is a true point. And Kidd, another true point, is 5th.

I just picked what I thought were the top 3, and the numbers are from 2009 too so the order is probably f'd up. Rondo I still view as a slasher/scorer, but Kidd definitely fits the PG type I had in mind. And Kidd like Stockton saw the finals multiple times with no ring.

[mogrovejo]

I just picked what I thought were the top 3, and the numbers are from 2009 too so the order is probably f'd up. Rondo I still view as a slasher/scorer, but Kidd definitely fits the PG type I had in mind. And Kidd like Stockton saw the finals multiple times with no ring.

Uh?

You guys need to see more EC basketball.

[jacobdrj]

Regular season, you want a scoring PG who can keep your offense humming along.

In the playoffs you either need your PG to play defense or be able to hit spot-up-3's.

In either case, a slashing/slash-and-kick PG is nice, but not necessary.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Uh?

You guys need to see more EC basketball.

Yeah, totally. Pauls, Rondo is a classic PG (without a jumpshot), not a score-first guy at all.