Why can't dominant Point Guards win ships?

[jack612blue]

Its always been said a team led by a PG can never win a title...

why is that

[ducktape]

http://lakers.topbuzz.com/gallery/d/1295-3/magic-johnson-oly_full_56875188cc009_radio_shack_s.jpg

[NewYorkNoPicks]

i think what you mean is shoot first point guards... the problem with them is despite their talents, one man can never do it alone, so if the guy with the ball in his hands most frequently shoots the most then obviously his teammates aren't contributing much.

shoot first point guards dont allow their teammates to contribute. a guy like Chris Paul could win though, he's a great balance of scoring and passing.

[cteach111]

i dont think Magic qualifies as your typical PG seeing as how the guy is 6'9". Magic is just another example of how if you're big, have a hell of a BBIQ and are a skilled player, you can play this game at a level that few can.

But "Big" being the key before anything else though.

[Real Men Wear Green]

i dont think Magic qualifies as your typical PG seeing as how the guy is 6'9". Magic is just another example of how if you're big, have a hell of a BBIQ and are a skilled player, you can play this game at a level that few can.

But "Big" being the key before anything else though.

They aren't big enough to impact the game on both side the optimal would be to have a PG as second guy or /1b.
http://www.e-megamall.us/upfile/jerseys/nba/desc/2011122585679217.jpg

[fpliii]

Offensive Usage / Defensive Usage Percentages over the past couple of seasons (by position):

PG - 21 / 13
SG - 20 / 12
SF - 18 / 14
PF - 19 / 19
C - 16 / 22

(sources: hoopdata and backpicks)

note that offensive usages don't add up to 100% because the positions aren't equal in depth due to asymmetric lineups, and defensive usages don't add up to 100% since some shots are unguarded

a PG can impact the game offensively quite a bit, but he can't do all that much defensively since he doesn't guard the paint and anchor a defense

recent champions have had sturdy bigs as defensive anchors most of the time, and the few teams that haven't (Bulls, Heat; Bad Boy Pistons and Big Three Celtics to a lesser extent) have had versatile 'positionless' wings who can guard multiple positions

[rufuspaul]

http://lakers.topbuzz.com/gallery/d/1295-3/magic-johnson-oly_full_56875188cc009_radio_shack_s.jpg

:roll:

[Mach_3]

http://www.e-megamall.us/upfile/jerseys/nba/desc/2011122585679217.jpg

Beat me to it.

[WockaVodka]

Probably because most teams that build around PGs suck at it.

[Magic731]

Never underestimate the impact of a big man in a basketball game. The highest percentage shot in basketball is the dunk. Dunks become that much harder to do when you have a massive 7 footer putting his hands up, making it almost impossible to dunk the ball. So this big man takes away the highest percentage shot in basketball, and also lowers the percentage of other great shots such as the "million $" spot. This forces the other team to take lesser percentage shots and more often than not the team that shoots the highest percentage wins.

On the other end of the floor, a big 7 footer can generally pull off the dunk better and easier than anyone else. I mean, they are 7'0" tall with massive arms, the ball barely has to leave their hands for it to slide into the basket. These are all very high percentage shots, so when your number one offensive threat is a big man, the majority of your shots are going to be very high percentage looks.

Another thing big men dominate is rebounding. To win a game of basketball you need to score more than the other team. To score, you need to have possession of the ball. To get possession of the ball you can either steal it off the other team, force a turnover or rebound the ball. Since teams generally turn the ball over 10-15 times a game compared with 40-50 rebounds, rebounding the ball is the most effective way to gain possession of the ball.

If your team wins the rebound count and shoots a higher percentage from the field, you will win 95% of your games.

[fpliii]

Never underestimate the impact of a big man in a basketball game. The highest percentage shot in basketball is the dunk. Dunks become that much harder to do when you have a massive 7 footer putting his hands up, making it almost impossible to dunk the ball. So this big man takes away the highest percentage shot in basketball, and also lowers the percentage of other great shots such as the "million $" spot. This forces the other team to take lesser percentage shots and more often than not the team that shoots the highest percentage wins.

On the other end of the floor, a big 7 footer can generally pull off the dunk better and easier than anyone else. I mean, they are 7'0" tall with massive arms, the ball barely has to leave their hands for it to slide into the basket. These are all very high percentage shots, so when your number one offensive threat is a big man, the majority of your shots are going to be very high percentage looks.

Another thing big men dominate is rebounding. To win a game of basketball you need to score more than the other team. To score, you need to have possession of the ball. To get possession of the ball you can either steal it off the other team, force a turnover or rebound the ball. Since teams generally turn the ball over 10-15 times a game compared with 40-50 rebounds, rebounding the ball is the most effective way to gain possession of the ball.

If your team wins the rebound count and shoots a higher percentage from the field, you will win 95% of your games.

I agree with you for the most part, but of Dean Oliver's Four Factors (margins in eFG%, ORB%, TOV%, FT/FGA) which explain a good 99% of outcomes or so in games, FT/FGA margin is king (followed by eFG%, ORB%, TOV% in that order).

If you're going against a team with dominant bigs you have to do at least two of the following: shoot extremely efficiently from the perimeter compared to your opponent (3's and long 2's that draw out defensive anchor types), draw contact and go to the line more often than your opponent, and get out in transition without turning the ball over very frequently.

[stallionaire]

http://lakers.topbuzz.com/gallery/d/1295-3/magic-johnson-oly_full_56875188cc009_radio_shack_s.jpg
:roll: :roll: :roll: He looks hilarious.

[DStebb716]

People posting Thomas and Magic: He's talking about now. No dominant PG has won a chip in a long time. The last PG to win a championship while they were considered elite at the time?

Chauncey Billups? He's the best PG to win in the last 10 years...

[stallionaire]

Answer to the thread:

A pointguard's role is multi-faceted. He needs to be the floor general for his team, pass at a high level to find a good shot for his team, and they should have some scoring prowess.

They need to be able to do all of these things and if a pointguard is your first option, they need to do these things at a very high level. Most emphasis would be on scoring.

Their job is too spread out and if they lack even one of those skills, you could have A LOT of problems. Obviously there are exceptions. Magic Johnson won but Kareem says, "Hi."

A pointguard needs to have SOMEBODY with them to play their position at a high level to win. Asking a pointguard to do everything is a bad idea. You don't want them doing everything. You want them doing what their best at.

Allen Iverson was surrounded with crafty role players but he couldn't win because at the end of the day it all came down to him doing all his tasks amazingly.

[Artillery]

Point guards are usually the shortest guys on the court and, as a result, are the easiest to stop or neutralize come playoff time. Smarter to build a team around a dominant big man or wing player. Nash, Paul, DWill, and Rose have all failed to lead their teams to the finals. Even this year, we saw Tony Parker lead his team to conference finals and lose to a squad led by a forward.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Because you're only as good as the players you pass to. If you're best player is the one constantly passing then you have a problem. Also, if your PG is shoot first, then the rest of the team gets frozen out. Your PG should not be your main option but he CAN be your best player.

[Celtic_Pride]

I thought Rondo was a quarter short in winning the FMVP in 2010. He was the Celtics best player throughout the playoffs unlike Billups and Parker!

[Hank]

well this guy right here played mostly PG in the playoffs (carrying the ball upcourt more than anyone on the team)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjKej92KcQs

^^ and as you can see there he was dominant right off the bat. We have not seen a guard come into the league and play so dominantly with such a polished all-around game so soon entering the league since Michael Jordan. He would have had a title that year in that superb video if not for an injury when his team was up 3 games to 2 in the conference finals... but he won the title the following year --- by mostly playing the point bringing the ball up court more often than anyone on those teams

[Hank]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjKej92KcQs



at 3:15 of the video

:bowdown:


2 playoff years in row he dominated the #1 ranked defense in the league, and it was only his 2nd and 3rd year in the NBA.. Kobe got his ass totally kicked losing 4 games to 1 in the 2004 Finals (losing by an average of 12 pts in their 4 losses), to the exact same team and defense. But Wade absolutely tore that defense and team apart

prime wade >> prime kobe

MULTIPLE members of that Detroit team and top-ranked defense said that Wade was the hardest player they've ever had to guard in their careers

[swi7ch]

http://lakers.topbuzz.com/gallery/d/1295-3/magic-johnson-oly_full_56875188cc009_radio_shack_s.jpg

Magic is 6'9".

[Smoke117]

I don't even agree with Isiah Thomas as he wasn't even dominate. He's had his heroic moments, but his 1989 playoff run is nothing special. He was better in 1990, but the Piston's teams were stacked and his playoff runs are nothing close to Magics in 87 and 88 when he was the clear cut man and those were his teams. Not to say those Laker teams weren't stacked either, but Magic was still a significantly better player and much more dominate. Isiah Thomas could be replaced. Magic Johnson couldn't.

[lilgodfather1]

A point guad has not won a championship as the undeniable best player on the team since Thomas won. Generally Big men win titles Shaq - 3, KAJ - 3, Wilt - 2, Russell - 11, Hakeem - 2, the top 5 C's in NBA history have 21 titles between them as the best players on their team. Then we look at the PG's who have been the undeniable best on their team and you have Magic - 3, Thomas - 2, and that's it imo. Chauncey wasn't the best Piston, and Parker/Duncan were basically equals imo.

Wing players have been winning titles most recently though for some reason.

LeBron - 1, Kobe - 2, Wade - 1. Of the past 6 titles elite wing players have been the best on 4 of them.

[RedBlackAttack]

I don't even agree with Isiah Thomas as he wasn't even dominate.
Huh?

He was clearly the best player on the best team in the league... Back-to-back champs and he ALWAYS led the way. There was never a question at the time who the "alpha dog" (newfangled terminology in the basketball world) was on those Pistons teams.

Even if you are a stat junkie that doesn't care so much about which guys make the big plays in the big moments... Isiah put up 21+ points and 14 assists for an entire season (1985).

In their last championship run, he averaged, what? 22 points and 8 assists and 6 rebounds per game? Along with a multitude of clutch sequences?

He was certainly dominant... Best PG in the league in those two seasons and one of the Top 3 players in the game.

[Tenchi Ryu]

Its not that dominate PGs can't, its that they haven't yet cause we are just now seeing them. This new breed of PGs are evolved from the past PG mold. PGs can score now, they can dunk now, they can pretty much play like a wing player who can carry a team with scoring. You got hints of that with Isiah and Magic, but they were the first and only of their kind at the time. Now, you have an entire league with these types of PGs emerging. Its only a matter of time before it happens.

Westbrook was arguably co-captain during the Finals, or he at least damn sure played like it. And he was right there, inches from proving this thread wrong.

[blacknapalm]

because there's more parity between PG's in the league. there's a plethora of talented, game changing PG's. they negate each other. a quality big + a good enough PG? still a premium that has more ways of taking over the course of a series. moreover, a defensive big will always have a bigger impact on the game on that end of the floor.

the next dominant back to the basket? he's going to be huge as the dearth of the big man today is going to let him go unchecked.

the last great PG to win it all was probably parker in 2007. that was vs. an overmatched lebron team. btw, duncan was still pretty good then. before that? you probably have to go all the way back to magic. i don't count rondo in '08 because that was clearly KG's and pierce's team. rondo was good then, but not great.

[Marikina]

Another thing big men dominate is rebounding. To win a game of basketball you need to score more than the other team. To score, you need to have possession of the ball. To get possession of the ball you can either steal it off the other team, force a turnover or rebound the ball. Since teams generally turn the ball over 10-15 times a game compared with 40-50 rebounds, rebounding the ball is the most effective way to gain possession of the ball.


Or as Slam Dunk puts it: "the one who controls rebounding, controls the game".

[Smoke117]

Huh?

He was clearly the best player on the best team in the league... Back-to-back champs and he ALWAYS led the way. There was never a question at the time who the "alpha dog" (newfangled terminology in the basketball world) was on those Pistons teams.

Even if you are a stat junkie that doesn't care so much about which guys make the big plays in the big moments... Isiah put up 21+ points and 14 assists for an entire season (1985).

In their last championship run, he averaged, what? 22 points and 8 assists and 6 rebounds per game? Along with a multitude of clutch sequences?

He was certainly dominant... Best PG in the league in those two seasons and one of the Top 3 players in the game.

He could have easily been replaced by a Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Mark Price, Steve Nash, John Stockton, Rod Strickland, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd.

[hkfosho]

Besides Magic and Isiah, I can't think of any other dominant PG (offensively and defensively) to have won a championship. The potential is out there, I keep praising John Wall despite his losing record - if you put him in a team with the right players, I can see him going far. Kyrie is another upcoming PG who is proving to be an all-star who I also believe has the potential to win a ring as a dominant PG. And of course there's Derrick Rose who was presumably going to be the future icon for the PG era before his injury. I still have high hopes for him, and I do believe he can win a ring once he's fully healthy provided he has the right players and of course coach Thibs. Then there's guys like Westbrook (maybe), CP3, and Dwill who are still very capable of winning a championship as the best player on their team.

[Go Getter]

He could have easily been replaced by a Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Mark Price, Steve Nash, John Stockton, Rod Strickland.
:no:

You sir, know NOT what you speak of.

[Punpun]

Its always been said a team led by a PG can never win a title...

Kobe did it twice. :biggums:

[Odinn]

As for top 10 PGs ever;
(Magic, Zeke, Big O, Kidd, Stockton, Payton, Frazier, Nash, Archibald, Cousy)
7x MVPs
4x FMVPs
7x the best player on a championship teams

As for top 10 Cs ever;
(Kareem, Shaq, Russell, Wilt, Hakeem, Moses, DRob, Mikan, Reed, Walton)
23x MVPs
13x FMVPs
27x the best player on a championship teams

[blacknapalm]

As for top 10 PGs ever;
(Magic, Zeke, Big O, Kidd, Stockton, Payton, Frazier, Nash, Archibald, Cousy)
7x MVPs
4x FMVPs
7x the best player on a championship teams

As for top 10 Cs ever;
(Kareem, Shaq, Russell, Wilt, Hakeem, Moses, DRob, Mikan, Reed, Walton)
23x MVPs
13x FMVPs
27x the best player on a championship teams

ball game. a dominant big is just more valuable in this league over a dominant PG and even if they change the rules to benefit perimeter players, i can't really see that trend changing. dominant bigs just alter games in more ways. problem is...where is the next dominant back to the basket big?

[ThaRegul8r]

i dont think Magic qualifies as your typical PG seeing as how the guy is 6'9". Magic is just another example of how if you're big, have a hell of a BBIQ and are a skilled player, you can play this game at a level that few can.

But "Big" being the key before anything else though.

This is ridiculous. No one said anything about "your typical PG." The OP said "a team led by a PG can never win a title." Magic Johnson is a dominant PG who led his teams to titles.


People posting Thomas and Magic: He's talking about now. No dominant PG has won a chip in a long time.

That's not what the OP said:


Its always been said a team led by a PG can never win a title...

why is that

He said "a team led by a PG can never win a title." Never means never. Not ever. Contrary to popular belief, "ever" encompasses more than "now."

[bluechox2]

i would say billups lead that pistons team

[BoutPractice]

Maybe Billups was the leader, but their amazing defensive frontcourt was the main reason they won.

[Noof]

:lebronamazed:


...

[guy]

The league is relatively young and a lot of the teams that have won usually win multiple. If you really think about it, only about 25 players since after Mikan have actually "led" a team to a title as the clear best player, 2 being PGs. If that claim was distributed evenly, it would be about 5 PGs. 2 vs 5 isn't that huge a difference.

[Meticode]

He could have easily been replaced by a Kevin Johnson, Tim Hardaway, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Mark Price, Steve Nash, John Stockton, Rod Strickland.
:biggums: You could easily be replaced by PleezeBelieve with what you're talking. Get my drift!?

[I LUV KOBE]

If Rose become healthy for the rest of his career, I think he has the chance to win ship as a dominant PG..

[Owl]

http://www.e-megamall.us/upfile/jerseys/nba/desc/2011122585679217.jpg
I don't think Isiah contradicts the prior posters point that most pgs don't influence the play enough on both ends to be the best player. Isiah by the time he won the titles was one of a number of cogs (Dumars, Laimbeer and Rodman are at least close to him in terms of impact and the team went 9 and then 8 deep).


because there's more parity between PG's in the league. there's a plethora of talented, game changing PG's. they negate each other. a quality big + a good enough PG? still a premium that has more ways of taking over the course of a series. moreover, a defensive big will always have a bigger impact on the game on that end of the floor.

the next dominant back to the basket? he's going to be huge as the dearth of the big man today is going to let him go unchecked.

the last great PG to win it all was probably parker in 2007. that was vs. an overmatched lebron team. btw, duncan was still pretty good then. before that? you probably have to go all the way back to magic. i don't count rondo in '08 because that was clearly KG's and pierce's team. rondo was good then, but not great.
This is a good point. It's harder for a pg to distance themselves from the pack because there are generally more good pgs (because there is a much larger pool of potential pgs in the population) conversely there's a much greater chance for one team to have a large advantage at the center position because there are so few players with the required physique, agility, co-ordination and skills to play the position.

Though for what it's worth the center position is okay depth wise at the moment, certainly a lot better than it was a decade ago with Shaq so much better than the rest of the field.

So you get plenty of good pgs, recent examples being Rondo, Parker and Billups, winning titles, but not so many exceptional ones.

[Kevin_Gamble]

Why not? They just have to have the right cast and the right system. The Heat won a championship with Wade as a penetrate/kickout guy. Phoenix and Utah came close during the Jordan-years with offenses focused on the PG + Big pick & roll combo. Seattle came close with a PG-dominant offense. Those teams didn't lose because their offenses were PG-centered--they lost because they went up against Jordan and Pippen.

[DKLaker]

They aren't big enough to impact the game on both side the optimal would be to have a PG as second guy or /1b.

Right, this is a SG & SF league now......the other spots are not as important

[TheMan]

Its always been said a team led by a PG can never win a title...

why is that?
http://www.interbasket.net/players/usa/isiah.jpg

[nathanjizzle]

you guys actually believe this shit. :roll:

[AK47DR91]

OP still has a point. Not that you can't win with a dominant Point Guard but it's a whole lot harder to do than a dominant PF or C. It's a big man's game, always have and will always be even if the marketing media wants to market around SG's and SF's.

In Magic's case, even as a 6'9" point guard, he still had Kareem(Top 5 All-Time), Worthy, Scott, Cooper and Rambis as teammates.

Thomas' Bad Boy Pistons were 8 or 9 man deep team. Dumars, Rodman, Lambeer, Aguire, Vinnie Johnson, Mahorn, Salley and Edwards. Billups' 2004 squad was similar too.

Now you move into the SG's, stil somewhat the same case but less deep of a roster. Jordan still needed Pippen/Grant or Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc. Kobe needed Gasol/Bynum/Odom.

Wade in 2006 might be one of the rare feat where a Guard led his team to a title without a real stacked roster. But he also had Shaq, who was still the best center at the time.

We've seen 2000 Shaq, 1994 Hakeem and 1999 & 2003 Duncan win without much of a supporting case on 4 occasions. That's already 4 times more than we can say about Guards in similar cases(lack of supporting cast).

[AK47DR91]

Right, this is a SG & SF league now......the other spots are not as important
Way wrong. The game is marketed towards SGs and SFs but big's(PF & C) are still the reason(or half the reason) why teams win championships.

2012 Heat is one of the very very few cases where a team won it all without much of a C/PF rotation.

[DKLaker]

Way wrong. The game is marketed towards SGs and SFs but big's(PF & C) are still the reason(or half the reason) why teams win championships.

2012 Heat is one of the very very few cases where a team won it all without much of a C/PF rotation.

Wrong....Pau was good but Bynum did next to nothing for the Lakers......Kobe, a SG was the reason the Lakers won.
There are many more star SG and SF than any other position.....that's a no-brainer. There are only 2 good Centers in the NBA.......and they aren't legendary by any stretch......don't even bother to argue :facepalm

[triangleoffense]

Nah they have.

Isiah, Magic, Cousey says Hi.

Also payton, Stockton, AI almost says hi.

[Timmy D for MVP]

People posting Thomas and Magic: He's talking about now. No dominant PG has won a chip in a long time. The last PG to win a championship while they were considered elite at the time?

Chauncey Billups? He's the best PG to win in the last 10 years...

Tony Parker. :confusedshrug: I mean he wasn't the leader of the squad, but Tony was at the time, maybe not elite, but considered among the top tier I think. Maybe that's just me, he always seems to be forgotten about when talking about current PG's.

To answer the question you could win with an elite PG as the centerpiece. You just need to build perfectly around them because the margin of error is greater. The Bulls did well with Rose, but it wasn't enough. I wonder if the Cavs head in that direction or if they try to build a big 2 (or 3 or whatever). It's rare because it's harder to do, you'd more often than not rather build around an elite big and an elite PG.

[pauk]

They do... Lebron just won one... he is a drafted PG/SG, sure he starts SF but he a is a point-forward and starts SF to also use his scoring ability.... he is a PG in a PFs body, he has a true point-guards mindset, if he wasnt such a good scorer Lebron would be starting PG officially and droping major assist numbers, hell those last two Finals games he averaged 12.5 assists a game.. that last 13 assist game (triple double) gave the Heats best Finals game and gave them the championship, a blowout and he only scored 26... could have scored even less the way he was setting his teammates up...

[Kevin_Gamble]

Way wrong. The game is marketed towards SGs and SFs but big's(PF & C) are still the reason(or half the reason) why teams win championships.

2012 Heat is one of the very very few cases where a team won it all without much of a C/PF rotation.

But the Heat have one of the best PFs in the game.

[BarberSchool]

has very little to do with PG or position. It has to do with whether your star player shoots 57% or 41 %, and how often they turn the ball over relative to their creation for others.

Jordan not only had a very high shooting percentage despite all the late shot clock forces, but he created for his teammates very well and had lower turnovers than other comprable stars. No wonder his squad would have won an 8-peat.

Iverson, marbury, Francis, Rose, etc.....(domiannt point guards as you say) all of these dudes have lower Shooting percentages, and higher turnovers than corresponding players who have usage rates the same as them.

So generally they don't go as far as teams who have more efficient superstars.

[The Iron Fist]

OP still has a point. Not that you can't win with a dominant Point Guard but it's a whole lot harder to do than a dominant PF or C. It's a big man's game, always have and will always be even if the marketing media wants to market around SG's and SF's.

In Magic's case, even as a 6'9" point guard, he still had Kareem(Top 5 All-Time), Worthy, Scott, Cooper and Rambis as teammates.

Thomas' Bad Boy Pistons were 8 or 9 man deep team. Dumars, Rodman, Lambeer, Aguire, Vinnie Johnson, Mahorn, Salley and Edwards. Billups' 2004 squad was similar too.

Now you move into the SG's, stil somewhat the same case but less deep of a roster. Jordan still needed Pippen/Grant or Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc. Kobe needed Gasol/Bynum/Odom.

Wade in 2006 might be one of the rare feat where a Guard led his team to a title without a real stacked roster. But he also had Shaq, who was still the best center at the time.

We've seen 2000 Shaq, 1994 Hakeem and 1999 & 2003 Duncan win without much of a supporting case on 4 occasions. That's already 4 times more than we can say about Guards in similar cases(lack of supporting cast).
:facepalm

Shaq
Alonzo
GP
Walker
Jason Williams
James Posey


Thats a great mix of veterans there.

[RaininTwos]

Dominant PG's don't win titles on their own because of unfortunate circumstances. You have to have the right things in place in order to win a championship.

New Jersey Nets Jason kidd is the prime example of this. Dude dragged them to two finals appearances. He could have used some more offensive firepower. He took a bunch of role players so far, imagine if he had a number two player who could get buckets?

[The Iron Fist]

Dominant PG's don't win titles on their own because of unfortunate circumstances. You have to have the right things in place in order to win a championship.

New Jersey Nets Jason kidd is the prime example of this. Dude dragged them to two finals appearances. He could have used some more offensive firepower. He took a bunch of role players so far, imagine if he had a number two player who could get buckets?
Kidd>>>>Lebron

[chocolatethunder]

Answer to the thread:


Allen Iverson was surrounded with crafty role players but he couldn't win because at the end of the day it all came down to him doing all his tasks amazingly.
And Iverson played SG with Eric Snow as the PG and McKie spelling Snow at the point when Iverson was in the game and spelled Iverson at the 2 when he was on the bench. Iverson played mostly SG his whole career because he sucked at PG. He could have been very effective at Pg if he played like Isaiah but he didn't. That's ok because Philly built a great team around him and it allowed him to do what he did best which was score.

[RaininTwos]

Kidd>>>>Lebron

No, but he was awesome player in his prime.:cheers:

[RaininTwos]

And Iverson played SG with Eric Snow as the PG and McKie spelling Snow at the point when Iverson was in the game and spelled Iverson at the 2 when he was on the bench. Iverson played mostly SG his whole career because he sucked at PG. He could have been very effective at Pg if he played like Isaiah but he didn't. That's ok because Philly built a great team around him and it allowed him to do what he did best which was score.

I swear you haven't said one thing positive about AI your whole time here. I was under the impression that Larry Brown slid AI to the two spot. It's not like he had the choice of sitting back and facilitating, he was playing a ton of offensively challenged players. Just a whole bunch of hustle players behind their major players.

[chocolatethunder]

I swear you haven't said one thing positive about AI your whole time here. I was under the impression that Larry Brown slid AI to the two spot. It's not like he had the choice of sitting back and facilitating, he was playing a ton of offensively challenged players. Just a whole bunch of hustle players behind their major players.
Larry Brown made AI the two and they built a team around him that allowed him to do what he did best which was score. What's negative about that? It worked perfectly and they did great. He realized that's how he was most effective and used that to their advantage. Their finals run was great and he had a great season that year. He had already tried to be a PG and that was an abject failure and Brown realized this. That's not a negative thing. Lots of scorers can't play PG. Just because he was short doesn't mean he had to be a PG. He was one of the best scorers of his era. He was not great with the ball. He got assists but he was not a court vision kind of guy. No one would ask jason kidd to score 30 and it was dumb trying to make AI into a PG.

Let's get something straight about that team. It wasn't a bunch of scrubs. What it was was a team assembled around their best player that complimented him best. His defensive liabilities were covered up by a lock down defensive team. They had a great sixth man and great defenders at every position. Defense wins championships. He didn't play well w Stackhouse because Iverson wasn't a PG and neither was Stackhouse. No biggie. So they brought in players who complimented him. He was best with the ball in his hands and you live and die with that. They were very close and a very good team for a few years. Not everyone can win a championship. As a Sixer fan I can happily live with that. He had several good years here and I enjoyed watching those years.
As far as negative things go, I'm a realist. HE PLAYED AS HARD AS ANYONE EVER. However, he was not loved by his teammates for his practice habits. Even under Larry Brown he barely practiced and this caused lots of internal problems. How you can view that as a good thing I have no idea. When Billy King left the organization and talked about the insanity there while AI was a sixer it was crazy. As you probably know, most of the greats from Magic to Bird to Jordan to Kobe to Hakeem to Lebron are all gym rats who are not only the MOST TALENTED on their respective teams but who are also the hardest workers. AI was not a hard worker and it but him in the ass. When he was 25 it didn't really matter but as he got older and the athleticism faded it took its toll on his game. Lots of players who rely on athleticism make adjustments to their game as they get older like Nance, Barkley, Jordan and Hakeem and this adds many years to their career.
Stop being so butthurt about this dude. I wouldn't trade his best years as a Sixer for any other player. It's ok to like someone and still be realistic about them. He's not a god he's just some dude who played basketball.

[The Iron Fist]

No, but he was awesome player in his prime.:cheers:
Yes. By far. Check their triple doubles.

Check to see how many wins each got in the finals with "scrubs".

[The Iron Fist]

:applause:
Larry Brown made AI the two and they built a team around him that allowed him to do what he did best which was score. What's negative about that? It worked perfectly and they did great. He realized that's how he was most effective and used that to their advantage. Their finals run was great and he had a great season that year. He had already tried to be a PG and that was an abject failure and Brown realized this. That's not a negative thing. Lots of scorers can't play PG. Just because he was short doesn't mean he had to be a PG. He was one of the best scorers of his era. He was not great with the ball. He got assists but he was not a court vision kind of guy. No one would ask jason kidd to score 30 and it was dumb trying to make AI into a PG.

Let's get something straight about that team. It wasn't a bunch of scrubs. What it was was a team assembled around their best player that complimented him best. His defensive liabilities were covered up by a lock down defensive team. They had a great sixth man and great defenders at every position. Defense wins championships. He didn't play well w Stackhouse because Iverson wasn't a PG and neither was Stackhouse. No biggie. So they brought in players who complimented him. He was best with the ball in his hands and you live and die with that. They were very close and a very good team for a few years. Not everyone can win a championship. As a Sixer fan I can happily live with that. He had several good years here and I enjoyed watching those years.
As far as negative things go, I'm a realist. HE PLAYED AS HARD AS ANYONE EVER. However, he was not loved by his teammates for his practice habits. Even under Larry Brown he barely practiced and this caused lots of internal problems. How you can view that as a good thing I have no idea. When Billy King left the organization and talked about the insanity there while AI was a sixer it was crazy. As you probably know, most of the greats from Magic to Bird to Jordan to Kobe to Hakeem to Lebron are all gym rats who are not only the MOST TALENTED on their respective teams but who are also the hardest workers. AI was not a hard worker and it but him in the ass. When he was 25 it didn't really matter but as he got older and the athleticism faded it took its toll on his game. Lots of players who rely on athleticism make adjustments to their game as they get older like Nance, Barkley, Jordan and Hakeem and this adds many years to their career.
Stop being so butthurt about this dude. I wouldn't trade his best years as a Sixer for any other player. It's ok to like someone and still be realistic about them. He's not a god he's just some dude who played basketball.

[RaininTwos]

Larry Brown made AI the two and they built a team around him that allowed him to do what he did best which was score. What's negative about that? It worked perfectly and they did great. He realized that's how he was most effective and used that to their advantage. Their finals run was great and he had a great season that year. He had already tried to be a PG and that was an abject failure and Brown realized this. That's not a negative thing. Lots of scorers can't play PG. Just because he was short doesn't mean he had to be a PG. He was one of the best scorers of his era. He was not great with the ball. He got assists but he was not a court vision kind of guy. No one would ask jason kidd to score 30 and it was dumb trying to make AI into a PG.

Let's get something straight about that team. It wasn't a bunch of scrubs. What it was was a team assembled around their best player that complimented him best. His defensive liabilities were covered up by a lock down defensive team. They had a great sixth man and great defenders at every position. Defense wins championships. He didn't play well w Stackhouse because Iverson wasn't a PG and neither was Stackhouse. No biggie. So they brought in players who complimented him. He was best with the ball in his hands and you live and die with that. They were very close and a very good team for a few years. Not everyone can win a championship. As a Sixer fan I can happily live with that. He had several good years here and I enjoyed watching those years.
As far as negative things go, I'm a realist. HE PLAYED AS HARD AS ANYONE EVER. However, he was not loved by his teammates for his practice habits. Even under Larry Brown he barely practiced and this caused lots of internal problems. How you can view that as a good thing I have no idea. When Billy King left the organization and talked about the insanity there while AI was a sixer it was crazy. As you probably know, most of the greats from Magic to Bird to Jordan to Kobe to Hakeem to Lebron are all gym rats who are not only the MOST TALENTED on their respective teams but who are also the hardest workers. AI was not a hard worker and it but him in the ass. When he was 25 it didn't really matter but as he got older and the athleticism faded it took its toll on his game. Lots of players who rely on athleticism make adjustments to their game as they get older like Nance, Barkley, Jordan and Hakeem and this adds many years to their career.
Stop being so butthurt about this dude. I wouldn't trade his best years as a Sixer for any other player. It's ok to like someone and still be realistic about them. He's not a god he's just some dude who played basketball.

Did I offend you in some way?

They didn't even begin to build around AI properly. Stop the non-sense. He's a slashing superstar who can score buckets every night, inside and out. They had no perimeter shooting on that 01 team. None. That's not building around a superstar properly.

Also, having a team full of one dimensional hustle players isn't that hard to conceive. It's actually what some of the worst teams are made of. The 6ers GM should have tried to get AI a dependable shooter plus some additional scoring instead of having teams focus on AI and make his life a living hell.

Just because he carried that team to the finals, doesn't make that team the best fit for him. He was just that good.

Yes. By far. Check their triple doubles.

Check to see how many wins each got in the finals with "scrubs".

The teams aren't even comparable, but that's not how I judge players either.

[chocolatethunder]

Did I offend you in some way?
No. You started whining about how I have never said anything good about Iverson which isn't true. Don't try and call me out for something that isn't true and then when I tell you what's up try and backpedal.

[RaininTwos]

No. You started whining about how I have never said anything good about Iverson which isn't true. Don't try and call me out for something that isn't true and then when I tell you what's up try and backpedal.
That's not back pedalling at all. There is way to deny false accusations without sounding hurt. Figure it out.

[Artillery]

A point guad has not won a championship as the undeniable best player on the team since Thomas won. Generally Big men win titles Shaq - 3, KAJ - 3, Wilt - 2, Russell - 11, Hakeem - 2, the top 5 C's in NBA history have 21 titles between them as the best players on their team. Then we look at the PG's who have been the undeniable best on their team and you have Magic - 3, Thomas - 2, and that's it imo. Chauncey wasn't the best Piston, and Parker/Duncan were basically equals imo.

Wing players have been winning titles most recently though for some reason.

LeBron - 1, Kobe - 2, Wade - 1. Of the past 6 titles elite wing players have been the best on 4 of them.

Parker was never equal to prime TD. He was always the third best player on the '05/'07 title teams.

[AK47DR91]

:facepalm

Shaq
Alonzo
GP
Walker
Jason Williams
James Posey


Thats a great mix of veterans there.
Good support group but they were far from stacked. Definitely not as stacked as the teams I mentioned. The 2006 Heat is regarded as one of the worse championship teams in history for a reason.

Shaq was basically their #2, #3 and #4 option.
Zo was just a shotblocker by then. Payton was barely a starter.
Walker, Williams and Posey weren't #3 or #4 quality option guys either.