Reply With Quote
It's not about assist, it's more about the role of ''dominant point guards'' to ever lead their team to a championship.
Since Isiah and Magic, no PG has able to lead his team into a championship.
Since everyone is whining about basketball talk, I'm making a legitimate thread that will bring about discussion. Please, no trolling in this thread, it is meant to discuss a topic.
Countless players in the past and in recent years have gotten tons of credit for being able to take over games with their passing and "creating" ability. Countless players have been trashed for looking to score too much and not creating for their teammates as much as they should. On the flip side, you never see a player get criticized for looking to get assists too much instead of looking to score. The "pass first" PG gets exponentially more praise than the scoring PG as the "true PG".
Below is a list of all the championship teams in the last 20 years, with their regular season and playoff assists leaders (with their assist average).
regular season playoffs
91 Bulls Pippen (6.2) Jordan (8.4)
92 Bulls Pippen (7.0) Pippen (6.7)
93 Bulls Pippen (6.3) Jordan (6.0)
94 Rockets Maxwell (5.1) Olajuwon (4.3)
95 Rockets Cassell (4.9) Drexler (5.0)
96 Bulls Pippen (5.9) Pippen (5.9)
97 Bulls Pippen (5.7) Jordan (4.8)
98 Bulls Pippen (5.8) Pippen (5.2)
99 Spurs Johnson (7.4) Johnson (7.4)
00 Lakers Bryant (4.9) Bryant (4.4)
01 Lakers Bryant (5.0) Bryant (6.1)
02 Lakers Bryant (5.5) Bryant (4.6)
03 Spurs Parker (5.3) Duncan (5.3)
04 Pistons Billups (5.7) Billups (5.9)
05 Spurs Parker (6.1) Parker (4.3) (it should be noted Manu averaged 4.2)
06 Heat Wade (6.7) Wade (5.7)
07 Spurs Parker (5.5) Parker (5.8)
08 Celtics Rondo (5.1) Rondo (6.6)
09 Lakers Bryant (4.9) Bryant (5.5)
10 Lakers Bryant (5.0) Bryant (5.5)
So since 1991, a grant total of 1 player has averaged 7+ assists in the regular season and playoffs on a championship team. Note that this was done in a shortened season on a team that won a le with a slightly above average offense, and it was done by a role player playing with two future HOF big men. Basically, it would be a stretch to say Avery Johnson's ability to create shots for Tim Duncan and David Robinson was key to the Spurs' le run in 1999.
Excluding AJ, only 1 other player has averaged 6+ assists in the regular season and in the playoffs on a championship team ('92 Pippen). In this situation it is actually arguable to say Pippen's passing was important for the Bulls since they were the best offensive team in the NBA, and they had a limited amount of players who could create outside of Jordan and Pippen.
Just looking at this list, Pippen and Billups are the only players on this list who some would say "looked to create" and who were also major pieces on their team. Guys like Rondo and AJ were at best the 4th option on their team, and guys like Bryant, Parker, Wade, and Jordan etc. are considered players who looked to score before they looked to create.
This is supposed to beg the following questions:
Is the "assist" an overrated statistic, and is a player who averages 9+ assists really doing his team and teammates the favor people say he is?
Why do players (in particular point guards) who go after assists instead of points get so much credit for being "unselfish" and "wanting their team to win", when that style of play has had very little success in recent years?
Furthermore, why do players (in particular PG's and SG's) who look to score before they look to create get labeled as selfish teammates who put their personal stats before wanting the team to win, when it's almost always a score first player holding up the trophy in June?
Lastly, are getting tons of assists and being a great passer as intertwined as people think? Is a player who can get assists using his ability to draw defensive attention but can't make a simple entry pass or find teammates iso'ed against a mismatch really a "good" passer? Is someone who isn't good enough to draw defenders away from teammates but can make pinpoint entry passes and set players up for iso's just as good as if not a better passer than volume assist players?
This is my contribution to "better basketball discussion". Take it for what you will.
It's not about assist, it's more about the role of ''dominant point guards'' to ever lead their team to a championship.
Since Isiah and Magic, no PG has able to lead his team into a championship.
I thought it was always an overrated stat. As much as I loved watching Magic and his passes in the 80s, most of his assists seems like they came from ..........
Magic dribbling the ball up the court, dumps it into Kareem or Worthy, skyhook or baseline spin, basket.
, there were times in the early 80s when Magic and Norm Nixon would average double digits assists while being on the same squad.
Good post. I've posted the same numbers in the past when Spurs fans were whining about Tony Parker not being a "true point guard". There's nothing as overrated as a "true point guard". In the last 20 years, how many true point guards won a championship? Maybe one if you count AJ. Billups and Rondo evolved into true point guards but they won championships when they were still learning the position.
Why don't true point guards win championships more often? IMO, it's much easier to shut down a great passer than it is to shut down a great scorer. Over the course of a seven-game series, good defensive teams adjust and start dictating the passing lanes available.
A team with a true point guard has a defined head of the snake. You cut off the head of the snake and the rest of the team dies. On the other hand, teams with multiple players that can create offense for themselves or others are much more difficult to contain.
lol assists.
Seriously though, nice work. As a stat for an individual player yes, I think that assists are overrated as a metric of their overall value. A person putting up a lot of assists is not too different from someone putting up a lot of points. It's not inherently indicative that they are a great player or make a huge impact on wins and losses, just that that person tends to have the ball in their hand a lot.
However as an indicator of an entire team's overall offensive efficiency I think assists can say a lot.
Really what I think you've zeroed in on is an overarching trend in sports spearheaded by stat geeks like Hollinger. Is someone with a lot of blocks and steals an inherently "good" defender? Maybe, maybe not. There's still too many games and players in the league to be really informed about every facet of the game, but with the magic of the information age it's possible to crunch enough numbers to feel like you are.
Interesting stats.
I don't think the "assist" itself is an overrated stat. But I do think a ball-dominating player who averages 10+ assists a game can be an overrated asset. What I see when I look at those championship teams and assist leaders is that those teams had multiple players who could facilitate the offense, from Jordan and Pippen to Kobe and Shaq to Duncan and Parker and Ginobili. The only team that had one dominant facilitator might have been the Pistons with Billups and it was more of a product of his teammates not being facilitators than him actually being a great one. I think as NBA basketball has evolved, especially with defenses, it's hard to put the vast majority of offensive responsibility on only one player. Now, it's one thing to have a LeBron or a Kobe or a Wade on your team, but having at least one other above average facilitator goes a long way into team success because defenses can't only focus on shutting down one player.
I think there's still great value in the "assist." But I think the value shows more when there are multiple players on a team that can facilitate and rack up assists, when defenses try to shut down one of those guys.
A lot of the high assist guys are ball dominant players, so they might get a lot of assists but how many passes did it take for them to get it.
The top scorers like Kobe Wade and Lebron also dominate the ball, but they aren't relying on other people to score the points so its much more efficient.
Championships aren't won through assists or any single stat other than winning 4 times before the other team does. Championship teams generally have great passing big men (that can also command double teams on offense and are a force defensively) in addition to having other decent playmakers and passers on the perimeter. It helps to have a balanced roster so teams can't just zero in on a playmaker like the Spurs did to LeBron in 2007.
Assists only tell you some of the story anyway since there are plenty of great passes and looks that are created but aren't converted due to misses, players passing up their open shots, turnovers, etc.
Good thread
This is a tricky one
- Regarding Avery Johnson, I believe he has held, at some point, an NCAA division assist record in a single game, depite not playing with HOF's back then.
- When talking about Pippen, Jordan, Kobe, it's importante to keep in mind that they have played in the triangle offense, a system that allows sharing the ball, involving everyone.
I'm not saying they are not great passers, but heck, even Luc Longley could dish it out in Tex Winter's offense
- The fact that the statical leaders in assists haven't won a lot of les sunce 1991 has more to do with who they are surrounded with than anything else. Before 1991, Magic played with a great Laker team, and Isiah had plenty of scorers around him.
Stockton had Malone, who has choked in the NBA Finals, Kidd has played on average teams outside of New Jersey, and the Nets were to weak in the paint to stop Shaq, Duncan and Robinson; Nash has been playing on a very poor defensive team
- " Lastly, are getting tons of assists and being a great passer as intertwined as people think? Is a player who can get assists using his ability to draw defensive attention but can't make a simple entry pass or find teammates iso'ed against a mismatch really a "good" passer? Is someone who isn't good enough to draw defenders away from teammates but can make pinpoint entry passes and set players up for iso's just as good as if not a better passer than volume assist players? "
I believe a great passer is a player who has the ability to make plays, like Magic, Nash, Isiah.
Feared scorers like Jordan, Kobe, Ginobili would be in-between (they would get their assists mainly because of their avility to score and draw attention, but they were/are still terrific passers)
Then you have the overrated great passers, like Shaq; I mean, give me a ing break; Shaq is already a giant to begin with and when he was dominant other coaches would triple team him, all he had to was to raise his arm and pass the ball to an open teammate; " great passrer " my ass
good team ball-movement >>> high assist #s
perfect example are the spurs. during their championship years, they dont neccesarily have massive assist numbers, but have as good of ball movement as any team ever has. compare that to the Jazz, who on a yearly basis are at the top of the league in assist numbers, but never win .
"True PG's" give teams a false sense of security that screws them over 99 times out of 100. Take the 2007 Suns for example. Nash obviously didn't purposefully do this, but he gave the team a false sense of security during the regular season by making it look like Shawn Marion and Leandro Barbosa were good offensive players who could be counted on. What happened once they ran into a good defensive team that made it so Nash couldn't dish assists to anyone other than Amare? Marion and Barbosa became as useful as an asshole on your eblow.
I know whoever mentioned Magic Johnson was not trying to use it to discredit my argument, but plenty of people say "Well Magic Johnson was a PG who led a team to multiple championships!" and for them I have this:
The biggest shot of Magic's career was him going through the most congested part of the court and shooting a sky hook over a 7 footer. Do you see Steve Nash, Chris Paul, Deron Williams or Rajon Rondo making a game winning sky hook over a 7 footer anytime soon? Didn't think so.
That was a sound, well thought out post. Thanks. I'm just left wondering why post it using your troll instead of your real username, DoK...
well to be fair, they aren't 6-9 like Magic so a sky hook might be a little tough
"True PG's" give teams a false sense of security that screws them over 99 times out of 100. Take the 2007 Suns for example. Nash obviously didn't purposefully do this, but he gave the team a false sense of security during the regular season by making it look like Shawn Marion and Leandro Barbosa were good offensive players who could be counted on. What happened once they ran into a good defensive team that made it so Nash couldn't dish assists to anyone other than Amare? Marion and Barbosa became as useful as an asshole on your eblow.
I know whoever mentioned Magic Johnson was not trying to use it to discredit my argument, but plenty of people say "Well Magic Johnson was a PG who led a team to multiple championships!" and for them I have this:
The biggest shot of Magic's career was him going through the most congested part of the court and shooting a sky hook over a 7 footer. Do you see Steve Nash, Chris Paul, Deron Williams or Rajon Rondo making a game winning sky hook over a 7 footer anytime soon? Didn't think so.
I agree with this. The assist itself isn't overrated, but volume assist players are. When you have a good distribution of assist numbers it's a sign of a good team.
Players like Nash, CP3 and Deron Williams get credit for "evenly distributed scoring", but look at the stats on those championship teams. It's pretty obvious evenly distributed assist numbers are a lot more important than evenly distributed scoring.
Assists actually are important in the sense they gauge players getting touches a lot more than scoring does. When a PG dominates the ball and then passes it to someone who makes an open 3, and that happens 4 times with 4 different players, it might look like good ball movement because 4 different players got 3 points, but really the guy with 4 assists is the only one handling the ball consistently.
That was a sound, well thought out post. Thanks. I'm just left wondering why post it using your troll instead of your real username, DoK...
That was a sound, well thought out post. Thanks. I'm just left wondering why post it using your troll instead of your real username, DoK...
I figured since Goran Dragic is a PG who doesn't dominate the ball and gets criticized for not having enough assists he deserved this thread.
Since nobody has given a about my analysis, I will have to agree with myself
This may be an interesting side debate as well:
What is more more important to championship success, assists or rebounding?
I didn't do as much research and planning as DoK, but I looked up the last 10 NBA Finals series.
4 of the last 10 NBA championship teams were out-assisted by their NBA Finals opponent. BUT, every single NBA championship team in the last 10 seasons outrebounded their NBA Finals opponent.
Someone mentioned above how it's more important to have good ball movement than assists. I agree with that. And perhaps DoK's point in his original post carries more punch with the above stats. It would appear at least on paper that rebounding often times has a greater impact on team success than assists, at least as it pertains to winning championships.
i agree about shaq
remove assists as a stat, nash wont get those b2b mvps
that's it?i agree about shaq
I like having a PG who can dish, but like a few others have already said, it can really hurt your team when the entire offense revolves around that player creating for others.
I know this thread was created mostly because of your dislike for Nash. I do think the Suns have made the mistake of trying to build around him and rely on him too much for offense...but looking back, they really did put together a championship caliber team.
They key is having someone else with a dominant personality and similar talent. Someone who doesn't mind demanding the ball from the PG possession after possession when/if necessary.
When the PG is the dominant personality AND the most talented, that's when teams run into trouble for the "head of the snake" reasoning. Cut his passing angles off, shut down his scoring, and that team is dead in the water.
They key is having someone else with a dominant personality and similar talent. Someone who doesn't mind demanding the ball from the PG possession after possession when/if necessary.
When the PG is the dominant personality AND the most talented, that's when teams run into trouble for the "head of the snake" reasoning. Cut his passing angles off, shut down his scoring, and that team is dead in the water.
double posts are stupid as
No question. If you wanna look into specific statistics, my guess is that rebounding (offensive and defensive), opponents FG%, and turnovers committed are the 3 most important to championships. There's probably no direct relation to how well a team rebounds compared to whether or not it has a volume assist PG, but I'm willing to bet when the PG has the ball in his hands 90% of the time it leads to big men losing focus and not rebounding.
Teams that are run around a volume assist PG usually have a very high FG% and they generally force a lot of turnovers on defense because of the frantic style. The problem is, forcing turnovers and being a team that shoots a high % are two of the most unimportant parts to winning a championship. I doubt the Lakers were even in the top half of the league in either category this year. The team that shoots a high % but commits turnovers will almost always lose to the team that doesn't shoot as well but doesn't commit as many turnovers.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
