Originally Posted by SCdac
But how many championships have Westbrook, Rose, and AI won?
I genuinely like all those players and their at times surreal athleticism, but I also look at somebody like Tony Parker who literally never dunks (last one was about 7 years ago I believe) and he's one of the most accomplished PG's in the game. Some of the last winning PG's are what, Kidd, Chalmers, Fisher? etc
Case in point, in terms of physical abilities I think quickness and strength are more important at the PG position than "super" athleticism and crazy vertical. George Hill for instance is very long and athletic but that doesn't make him a great PG (not a bad player, but not the ideal PG). Plenty of examples of athleticism aint being all that.
What? Tony Parker is a pioneer of this category.
Westbrook and Rose are similar players to Parker, only with crazy athleticism.
AI? Guy could've won on the right team. As a leader? Very flawed.
The truth is true pgs that make max dollars are going to be hard to win with. Your best player has to be an aggressive scorer, no matter what position.
Think about past pgs that have LEAD teams to rings...or even close.
Walt Frazier, Magic Johnson, Isiah Thomas, Parker, Billups. Kidd, Stockton, Nash, Kevin Johnson...etc were at their best and helped their teams the most when they were aggressive scorers. Rondo's problem in the regular season is that he's not aggressive enough, though in the playoffs he's one of the best players in the game because he turns it on.
It doesn't say much about the position, but it just shows that if you have a player absorb so much of your cap and is the primary player that you can rely on for scoring...he has to deliver.
The amount of pressure that these pgs put on your team can be ridiculous, and if you can get one then you will be in good shape. However, I don't know if I'd call any one thing/position the future. I'd say the future if anything, are these crazy hybrid SFs that can play positions 2-5 and be point forwards like Lebron, Melo, Durant.