2nd 3peat jordan avg 3.8 apg

[knicksman]

while iverson/robertson are considered cancers yet bran stans want us to believe that hes better than jordan. LOL these espn sheeps

[Smook A.]

4.13

[mehyaM24]

i feel like im reading the post of a scatter brain. i have no idea what the title of your post has to do with your op. they're not even related.

[Kblaze8855]

I'm gonna assume you will edit that into something close to a complete thought shortly.

[knicksman]

4.13

per 36

[knicksman]

Not my fault you guys have low IQ

[fpliii]

OP - I think you raise some valid points, but I'm not sure that you're going about it the right way.

Ball-dominance—whether it comes from a gunner or playmaker—really causes teammates to get disengaged. You can say you'd want the ball in the hands of your best player, but your offense gets very predictable. In the playoffs quality teams with good defenses will really punish you if you're too dependent on one guy.

Not every player is skilled without the rock in his hands, so if your star player can do a lot of damage primarily off-ball, he's more portable, and can excel with different supporting casts and in different offensive systems. This was a big part of MJ's development, because it opened up Scottie to bring the ball up the court and initiate plays and sets.

The thing about Oscar and Iverson (as well as the other guys you bring up in these types of posts/threads), is that they were placed in situations where they didn't have the option to play differently. Unless you have other ball-handlers, or an ingenious coach who can come up with a system to optimize guys' strengths, your best option more often than not is to depend on your star to win you games. Again, doesn't work in the postseason, especially when over the course of a series an opponent can make adjustments and gameplan against you specifically.

[knicksman]

[QUOTE=fpliii]OP - I think you raise some valid points, but I'm not sure that you're going about it the right way.

Ball-dominance

[fpliii]

But I doubt they werent really skilled. Its more about their selfishness. They knew the triple double stats is over if they play off the ball. And there are lots of pgs in this league. So theres really no excuse to be holding the ball. Luckily there are only 10 players in this game. If this NFL or Soccer, I doubt this guys could win in those leagues.
The triple double didn't exist in the 60s though, and AI never gunned for them.

I'm not trolling at all, but which players on Oscar's Cincy teams or AI's Philly teams would you want to handle the ball more often? Do you honestly think they would've achieved more with those casts had things gone differently?

It's not the case all the time...obviously sometimes there are issues and guys do play selfishly on talented teams, and dominate the ball too much. I just don't think it was the case with Oscar, Iverson, 80s Jordan, Cavs LeBron, and some of the other guys you've mentioned in this context. They just played on teams without offensive talent. I don't think they could've won more by handling the ball less often. :confusedshrug:

[knicksman]

The triple double didn't exist in the 60s though, and AI never gunned for them.

I'm not trolling at all, but which players on Oscar's Cincy teams or AI's Philly teams would you want to handle the ball more often? Do you honestly think they would've achieved more with those casts had things gone differently?

It's not the case all the time...obviously sometimes there are issues and guys do play selfishly on talented teams, and dominate the ball too much. I just don't think it was the case with Oscar, Iverson, 80s Jordan, Cavs LeBron, and some of the other guys you've mentioned in this context. They just played on teams without offensive talent. I don't think they could've won more by handling the ball less often. :confusedshrug:

But they have stats about triple doubles. And larry hughes could play the pg with iverson. Considering that players like parker which are undrafted or isiah thomas. Players like rondo, nash, stockton who arent lottery picks. Same with lin. There are lots of pgs in this league because its a position that doesnt require height, so I really doubt that no one could play the point for these guys. Its really just them not wanting to give up stats. Or else bran wouldnt be winning 4 mvps by now if not for those stats same with iverson/robertson having 1 each.

[navy]

fpliii dropping knowledge. :bowdown:

The only time were ball dominance should be a fault of a player s if the offense is better when they dont handle the ball as much.

I dont see how you can fault a player for handling he rock so much if his teammates are clealy incapable of being playmakers.

[fpliii]

fpliii dropping knowledge. :bowdown:

The only time were ball dominance should be a fault of a player s if the offense is better when they dont handle the ball as much.

I dont see how you can fault a player for handling he rock so much if his teammates are clealy incapable of being playmakers.
The thing is, knicksman is raising a valid point. In general, ball-dominance isn't the way to play winning basketball. But as I said, in most situations, you'll have guys with garbage teams, and coaches just wanting to win games.

Kinda reminds me of basketball in middle school and a basketball camp I attended when I was young...coaches wanted to win as much as possible (much more in the pros than with kids), and generally you'll have guys who stand out so much, that you have to ride them through games.

The thing is, in the NBA, everybody is very talented. Every player can score the ball, but some guys are just superior at creating shots. Realistically to win titles, you need more than one guy who can do so, and multiple competent ball-handlers. LeBron in Cleveland, AI in Philly, and others played on rosters ready to contend—full of great role players and specialists—but missing a second piece. You're not going to win without another guy who can create his own shot, unless you have a genius coach and guys who are outstanding at playing team ball.

So while the stats are inflated (though I'm anti-box score in general), you're not going to legitimately contend anyway. Coaches want to win games, so they do so, even if it's a faulty strategy.

[Soundwave]

Kinda a by-product of losing Grant in favor of Rodman ... you're simply not going to get a lot of assists from passing to Rodman, even if he was the superior rebounder.

Grant was really good at playing off Jordan almost always getting an easy dunk or two around the rim from gimmes from MJ, but in a lot of ways the Bulls effectively played 4 on 5 offensively in the second threepeat.

[Mass Debator]

D-Wade averaged 3.8 assists too in the 06's Finals. If you can't be stopped or your teammates can't do shit, you go in for the kill.

[fpliii]

The difference is those guys were impact players. They made the finals or won multiple 50+ wins whereas oscar even missed the playoffs in his prime. Oscar only won 1 50+ games throughout his career before he became a buck. I actually have no problem with ball dominants as long as youre a full time pg aka pure pg. Magic and isiah won with 7 rings combined. What im having a problem is those players that score and pass at the same time or the score first pgs or point forward like larry bird, lebron, oscar. Ideal scorers should play off the ball coz its easier to score that way. But we all knew that off the ball means less apg thus less stats. So even though you have better stats. Youre actually not making your team better.
One thing...Bird very rarely dominated the ball. He wasn't a point forward, since he didn't bring the call up court of initiate the offense. He just made quick decisions, and created opportunities for teammates by thinking on his feet.

I started watching in the early 90s so I'm saying this based on watching the tape after the fact, but he handled it less than any other superstar, and did more with it. Literally he'd get the ball, and make a very quick pass or shot. That's why I think me might be one of the GOAT offensive players, since he's so good off ball.

Maybe you watched Bird live (again, I didn't), but I rarely see him handling the ball for more than 2 or 3 seconds during a possession.

Also, games won is a lousy criteria IMO. Russell and Wilt were in the league, Oscar's teammates sucked, and for part of his career, <82 games were played a season. That's why with/without numbers are superior. Oscar wasn't a pure PG I agree, but he didn't really change from Cincy to Milwaukee.

[Mr Exlax]

while iverson/robertson are considered cancers yet bran stans want us to believe that hes better than jordan. LOL these espn sheeps

Ah I see you're under the right account this time.

[fpliii]

BTW I'm sure many will dismiss knicksman for trolling/agenda(just as they did TonyMontana when he talked shot positional advantages, and talked up the all-time great bigs), but he does raise a legitimate point. It's part of why I don't value the box score much when evaluating players, and take portability into account in comparisons.

[knicksman]

One thing...Bird very rarely dominated the ball. He wasn't a point forward, since he didn't bring the call up court of initiate the offense. He just made quick decisions, and created opportunities for teammates by thinking on his feet.

I started watching in the early 90s so I'm saying this based on watching the tape after the fact, but he handled it less than any other superstar, and did more with it. Literally he'd get the ball, and make a very quick pass or shot. That's why I think me might be one of the GOAT offensive players, since he's so good off ball.

Maybe you watched Bird live (again, I didn't), but I rarely see him handling the ball for more than 2 or 3 seconds during a possession.

Also, games won is a lousy criteria IMO. Russell and Wilt were in the league, Oscar's teammates sucked, and for part of his career, <82 games were played a season. That's why with/without numbers are superior. Oscar wasn't a pure PG I agree, but he didn't really change from Cincy to Milwaukee.

yeah thats why bird is the most effective with this style. but despite of that, he pales in comparison to other style which pure pg(magic) and pure scorer(jordan).

games won is a lousy criteria but if we really compare the 2 styles(pure pg and score first pgs). Usually its the pure pgs that are more successful. And lebron, bird, oscar is no different than these score first pgs except for the height. If we increase the height of these pure pgs(like magic) they become more successful too IMO.

If this NFL, lebron wouldnt be successful. Luckily basketball can be played 1 on 5 but still come playoffs these guys regress. Oscar regresses during the playoffs and bird is known for losing as the top dog and regressing in the playoffs same with lebron. And I think its due to defenses tighting up. Its harder to score having the ball in your hands than playing off the ball. And IMO its the reason score first pgs arent as successful than pure pgs much more against scorers that dominates the top 10.

[DatAsh]

yeah thats why bird is the most effective with this style. but despite of that, he pales in comparison to other style which pure pg(magic) and pure scorer(jordan).

games won is a lousy criteria but if we really compare the 2 styles(pure pg and score first pgs). Usually its the pure pgs that are more successful. And lebron, bird, oscar is no different than these score first pgs except for the height. If we increase the height of these pure pgs(like magic) they become more successful too IMO.

If this NFL, lebron wouldnt be successful. Luckily basketball can be played 1 on 5 but still come playoffs these guys regress. Oscar regresses during the playoffs and bird is known for losing as the top dog and regressing in the playoffs same with lebron. And I think its due to defenses tighting up. Its harder to score having the ball in your hands than playing off the ball. And IMO its the reason score first pgs arent as successful than pure pgs much more against scorers that dominates the top 10.

Bird wasn't really a pg though. He was a better passer than almost all of them, but he wasn't a pg. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.

[knicksman]

Bird wasn't really a pg though. He was a better passer than almost all of them, but he wasn't a pg. Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying.


if youre the passer youre the pg. I dont follow the traditional pg/sg/sf,etc naming tho but the passer/scorer/defender, roles.