My brother is a Chris Paul Stan and he says
"Well Chris can lead a team to a ring he just needs a dominant scorer next to him... Like a carmelo anthony"
I said well that's the problem. Chris can't be that dominant scorer for his team himself
Is the PG position really worth a max contract?
- Thread starter Malta
- Start date
My brother is a Chris Paul Stan and he says
"Well Chris can lead a team to a ring he just needs a dominant scorer next to him... Like a carmelo anthony"
I said well that's the problem. Chris can't be that dominant scorer for his team himself
Even with titles, CP3 is not going to be a top 15 player all-time, let alone the best PG in the modern era. GMs overpay for size and wings that show any pulse of creating their own shot before they do the average PG, what are you really talking about here?
DUH! CP3 isn't Tim Duncan or Lebron...that was really tough to figure out.. If you aren't lucky to sign the wings and bigmen out of that 8 to a max then you go after the next productive players, which happen to be CP3, Westbrook,etc..If you want a fair comparison, you compare top 15 wingmen and bigmen to top 15 PG, all-time.
Why are you using the greatest top 20 players as the common rule over players like CP3, Deron and Rondo?
Now that is another argument all together. Case in point, Thunder have a better shot with Westbrook than they do with CP3. Past the fact the Dirk is a top 20 player, he had the 'right' mix of players to suit his game.
9 times out of 10 a big man needs the same, just the same as Durant needs Westbrook. use that same logic with Shaq, wouldn't he still need Kobe to go through a title run like that?
How many instances in recent history (30 years) have there been where ONE 2-guard, small forward, PF or center have won a title without having a player that's provided the same (or near) impact?
I'm using the modern big names just for argument sake. To make it more "fair," let me try something else.Why are you using the greatest top 20 players as the common rule over players like CP3, Deron and Rondo?
Now that is another argument all together. Case in point, Thunder have a better shot with Westbrook than they do with CP3. Past the fact the Dirk is a top 20 player, he had the 'right' mix of players to suit his game.
9 times out of 10 a big man needs the same, just the same as Durant needs Westbrook. use that same logic with Shaq, wouldn't he still need Kobe to go through a title run like that?
How many instances in recent history (30 years) have there been where ONE 2-guard, small forward, PF or center have won a title without having a player that's provided the same (or near) impact?
Wouldn't you say it would be easier to build a title team around an anchor like Drummond, Cousins, Horford, Davis, or Aldridge moving forward? Over a guy like Deron or Wall or Kyrie or Lillard? Simply because of their size, ability to get rebounds, blocks, influence opposing team shots around the rim, and be go-to scorers (except for Davis and Drummond so far)? With somebody like Deron, Rondo, Wall, Kyrie, Lillard, Holliday, or Curry, you still need a lot of other things. And those PGs, as good as they are, will be eating up 20-30% of your cap. Just look at the PGs these past champions have won with.
When Dirk and the Mavs won their title, you could make the argument that their best PG was JJ Barea
Only things that Kidd did better than Barea was defending his man and running the offense. Although running the offense is questionable since a lot of our offense was pretty simple: 2 man game and staggering picks for Dirk and Jet. I don't think it's just coincidence that perhaps the only team who's best player was a PG to win a title in recent memory was the 04 Pistons. And even that can be argued.
At the end of the day, you still need a complete team to win a title. No doubt. But it's probably the most unlikely to do so when you blow 20-30% of your cap on a Star PG. Not because the position has no value, or the player sucks, or anything like that. But simply because having an above average wing/frontcourt player is more important than having an above average PG.
Unless his name is Magic
d'antoni would have won a ring with cp3 in place of nash
not many players in general are worth the max. over half the guys making the max dont deserve it
not many players in general are worth the max. over half the guys making the max dont deserve it
Nah I don't, for a # of reasons.
i) it's easier to build around a player who is more talented and has more ability than position they play.
ii) Even with Drummond, Cousins, Davis and Aldridge you still need a lot of other things. Not giving a PG 30% of the salary is not quantifiable by suggesting that an anchor can potentially provide more impact from rebounds, blocks/influence shots and be go-to scorers vs playmaking and scoring.
iii) 90+% of leaders on title teams have always had a player that has provided near the same impact.
iv) You mention 'anchors' but no talk of 2s and 3s - is there any noticeable difference that would make Harden (a so-called elite SG) a better player to build around than Westbrook?
When Dirk and the Mavs won their title, you could make the argument that their best PG was JJ Barea
Only things that Kidd did better than Barea was defending his man and running the offense. Although running the offense is questionable since a lot of our offense was pretty simple: 2 man game and staggering picks for Dirk and Jet. I don't think it's just coincidence that perhaps the only team who's best player was a PG to win a title in recent memory was the 04 Pistons. And even that can be argued.
Dirk is not the rule though.
How many other SGs, SFs, PFs and Cs have won titles in the same manner in the last 30 seasons?
No it's most unlikely to do so if you blow it on the lesser talented player - regardless of position. Even if the best wing/frontcourt player is better to build around than the best PG (providing the wing is the better player), that doesn't mean to say that PG isn't worth building around or worth the max - because that PG could still provide more impact and be of more value than 95% of the rest of the wing players and big men in the league.
That's why I don't like this argument at all, because to say Westbrook or Rose (when healthy) doesn't have the impact or isn't worthy of a max contract whereas a player like Harden is.... it's
to me.Lemme ask you this - who are your top 10 players in the league?
good postFINALS MVPS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS:
3 DIFFERENT SGS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT CENTERS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT PFS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT PGS HAVE WON IT
AND ONE SF HAS WON IT
I FEEL ITS SILLY TO SINGLE OUT THE PG POSITION.
ITS NOT THE POSITIONS,
ITS THE SPECIAL PLAYERS WHO HAVE DOMINATED THE SPORT OVER THAT SPAN.
BEFORE DUNCAN, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME A PF WON FINALS MVP?
ATLEAST 20 YEARS...
3 DIFFERENT PGS WON THEM OVER THAT SPAN.
HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE A CENTER WINS ONE AGAIN?
DONT shyt ON AN ENTIRE POSITION
BECAUSE A SPECIAL PLAYER COMES ALONG & DOMINATES.
STARS HAVE TO ALIGN BECAUSE A LOT OF DOPE PGS DIDNT HAVE THE ROSTERS.
Exactly. That's why it has nothing to do with position. You can still be a PG and be worth the max. Especially how you've got a player like Westbrook who is of much value to the Thunder as Durant is.
Yet I'm suppose to believe that Westbrook doesn't have as much impact as Durant does on a game, because he plays PG?
Yes and no, I think you need one to win a title but if you have a Lebron or Pippen basically a point forward or a center who passes extremely well "Hakeem", you don't need one. But for a max contract, I don't think they are worth it honestly. Westbrook contract should be the max for a PG but I don't think a lot of players are worth the max in the NBA but if you gonna give it out, why not these PG's.
I'll take a dominate PG over a dominate wing unless that wing can spot at PG like Bird or Lebron. In the NBA size matters but so does execution. Dominate center is far more important than anyone else besides Lebron who does a lot of shyt.
Miami with Paul wouldn't work Lebron is a dominat ball handler...but replace norm with kd and make wade into Paul yeah they can win it all.
good postFINALS MVPS IN THE LAST 20 YEARS:
3 DIFFERENT SGS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT CENTERS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT PFS HAVE WON IT
2 DIFFERENT PGS HAVE WON IT
AND ONE SF HAS WON IT
I FEEL ITS SILLY TO SINGLE OUT THE PG POSITION.
ITS NOT THE POSITIONS,
ITS THE SPECIAL PLAYERS WHO HAVE DOMINATED THE SPORT OVER THAT SPAN.
BEFORE DUNCAN, WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME A PF WON FINALS MVP?
ATLEAST 20 YEARS...
3 DIFFERENT PGS WON THEM OVER THAT SPAN.
HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE A CENTER WINS ONE AGAIN?
DONT shyt ON AN ENTIRE POSITION
BECAUSE A SPECIAL PLAYER COMES ALONG & DOMINATES.
STARS HAVE TO ALIGN BECAUSE A LOT OF DOPE PGS DIDNT HAVE THE ROSTERS.
KD went from shooting 51% from the field and 55% efg to 45% from the field and a 50% eFG that's a significant drop. he had a game against Memphis that he shot something like 23% from the fieldThe Heat with Rose in place of LeBron isn't winning a thing, they lose their best defender & rebounder in the playoffs for someone that does everything at a lower level than Bron. That's a max contract replacing another max contract so you can't just fill the hole at SF they'd be even more undersized and worse on the boards than they are now.
KD averaged 31/9/6/1/1 and shot 45% during the playoffs without Russ, that's not really a big drop in efficiencyWhat do you think Westbrook numbers would look like without KD there, considering he shoots 42% in the playoffs with KD there to take pressure off him. How much of a dropoff would the Thunder have if they went with Eric Bledsoe at the point? Probably not as big of a dropoff as if they swapped KD for Deng, right?
If I'm a GM I'm not handing out max contracts to "come close", and it's not like PGs have always had crappy teams, it's that their impact generally isn't the same. We've got how many years of NBA history showing that building around a PG that isn't 6'9" isn't really a safe bet compared to transcendent players at other positions.
. his TS% dropped damn near 7 points that's insane considering players usually are more efficient come playoff time.
The War Report
NewNewYork
good post
KD went from shooting 51% from the field and 55% efg to 45% from the field and a 50% eFG that's a significant drop. he had a game against Memphis that he shot something like 23% from the field
This is a big man's league, that's why a team with so many flaws like Memphis looks like a better playoff team than regular season team. That's why Indiana got the league on smash and with their improving should be Miami UNLESS Oden is decent. If Oden is decent, Miami wins otherwise, Miami doesn't have an answer for Hibbert.
If I was building a team, I would always remember that but your bigs need to play like bigs. No Brook Lopez's who struggle to rebound. Bigs need to play like bigs. Rebound, protect the rim, set screens at the least, then the special ones can do that and score, pass and make the team a lot better.
If I was building a team, I would always remember that but your bigs need to play like bigs. No Brook Lopez's who struggle to rebound. Bigs need to play like bigs. Rebound, protect the rim, set screens at the least, then the special ones can do that and score, pass and make the team a lot better.
