Reply With Quote
I agree tho, if your goal is to win 50 games, make the playoffs, and lose, then having a star PG is the best and most effective way to do that. Just look at the Suns.
How many star PGs have won the finals?
What about the last 10 years?
How many teams with "star" PGs have made the Finals? How many "star" PGs have played in the finals over the last 10 years?
I agree tho, if your goal is to win 50 games, make the playoffs, and lose, then having a star PG is the best and most effective way to do that. Just look at the Suns.
I'll answer both those questions.
From 2001 - 2010:
5 star PGs have won the Finals.
11 of the teams that made the Finals had star PGs.
9 of those teams did not have star PGs. But 6 of the teams without star PGs had Kobe Bryant. One of the teams had LeBron.
Kind of crazy to think having a star PG is a bad thing. Don't allow Steve Nash to keep doing this to your psyche.
Name them. And no, Tim Duncan is the star of the Spurs. Parker isn't.
You can only be a star PG is you're the #1 option? I need to know your rules before we get into this...
Who are the other 2 anyway? I know you're gonna count Parker as 3 of the 5 (even tho he was the distant 3rd option in 2005 and wasn't a star at all in 2003), but who are the other 2?
Rondo
Billups
Calling 2008 Rondo a star PG is revisionist history if I've ever seen it
lol 10.6 PPG and 5.1 APG being considered a "star PG"
The depths PGluvas go to to defend their selfish midgets is remarkable
But hey, I'm sure it's just a coincidence the winningest coach of all time used an offense that has the PG play almost entirely off ball.
More or less..
Handled the ball more than any other player. Had the ball more than any other player. Even at that point he wasn't a role player PG.
you seriously consider 2008 Rondo a star PG?
Phil Jackson has never needed a good PG to win. But having Jordan, Kobe, Pippen and Shaw certainly helped.
Star players at any position are a good thing. If coupled with the right talent, star players at PG can win.
I guess by the criteria that handling the ball more than other players = star PG, Avery Johnson = star PG since he handled the ball more than David Robinson and Tim Duncan
Over the entire series, no. But he had his moments. I don't even like Rondo, but the 08 Finals is when he became a "star".
Did avery have a 16 assist game in the Finals? Or even a 15 point 7 ast performance with 3 other stars requiring touches as well?
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA 2 good games in the finals makes him a star when he had 3 other games where he played like ? OK!
lol playing well 40% of the time = star
You act as if i haven't seen those boxscores.
He also had a 15 pt 7 ast game. 16 assist game. And a 21 pt, 7 rbd, 8 ast game.
He's not an avery johnson or derek fisher.
Please explain to me why having a star PG is a bad thing.
every. single. time.
He had a 14 point 10 assist game
http://www.basketball-reference.com/...906230NYK.html
So I guess one more good game woulda made him a star, however at least he played nearly 40 minutes in every game and never got benched for a backup like Eddie "lol" House
Allen Iverson made a star career out of playing well 40% of the time.
So Eric Maynor > Westbrook?
They dominate the ball and force the other 4 players on the court to play off them rather than develop their own offensive game. A team with 1 stud PGs and a bunch of guys who play off him is incredibly easy to defend.
lol 2008 Rondo being a star PG
Did he get benched for his backup the other 60% of the time?
No, but good job pointing out that benching their star PG led to an OKC win
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
