"He needs the ball to be effective"

[Duiz]

Andrei Kirilenko is a perfect example when he is actually used. Also gotta love Lamar Odom and Luis Scola.

Someone who needs the ball to be difficulty is not multidimensional.

[jazzfan1971]

Some players dominate the ball. They dribble, dribble, drive, pass or shoot. If they don't have the ball, they aren't much use offensively. And if they aren't good on the defensive side of the court, they aren't much use at all.

Putting Gilbert Arenas and Baron Davis on the same team would sound great on paper, but, in practice one or both players would see a decrease in production.

[celticfan42487]

It has to do mostly with the effective use of the players you are paying. And how much synergy the team can have.

Take a Paul Pierce. Put him on a team with Wade at PG and Bulter at SF.

Butler at off the ball movement and 3 pointers is a much lesser then a Pierce playing off the ball, so Butler would be the second option to get the most out of your team.

Wade's potential lost being an off the ball player is much greater then Butler's loss palying off the ball so Wade gets the ball before Butler.

So based on getting the most out of your players, you would have a team with Wade as the dominate ball guard, a first team all-star, beign a first team all-star. a starting All-star talent in Butler be the second option and becoming a reserve/coaches addition all-star. And a reserve all-star in Pierce become a good role player.

That team's talent isn't synergentic. What's worse is the main part of your team would take up your capspace so you don't have much money to pay for roleplayers to make that team even better and really click. In effect you don't get the most use out of your dollar.

But it's not just being cheap, teams with synergy that are even low cost will beat teams that are high cost with no synergy often [see every knicks game the past 3 years]

[tombo125]

I think you can have any two players on the same team as long as they dont play the same position. The only time that doesn't work is if they are not particularly good or they are completely selfish. Essentially, truly good players can adapt to any situation.

[carrottop12]

Kyle Korver, he spreads the floor with out ever touching the ball.

Paul Millsap, he's always a huge threat for an offensive rebound and a put back.

[Entengtot]

ron ron doesnt need a ball just a plastic cup

[celticspierce34]

most star players need the ball to be effective

[Cassius]

Shaq and Kobe won three titles together. Look at Paul Pierce this year.

Generally, this statement gets thrown at players who don't have other viable scoring options on their team, so they HAVE to control the ball for their teams to win. Chris Bosh would feast on teams if he had a bonafide scorer keeping double teams off him and dumping the ball off on a regular basis. He gets zero easy baskets (and misses the few he does get).

I think the only guys who make the "ball need" statement true are simply selfish players who don't actually need the ball, but are just flat out selfish.

[etopn23]

It has to do with redundancy.

For example, Vince Carter, although a high-calibre player, would have no success on a team like the Spurs or the Lakers.

A Rockets team, for example, can't have two McGrady's.

Why wouldn't he have success? He's been sharing the ball the last 3 seasons in New Jersey without any problems.