Why play making point guards are overrated?

[sabonis]

Actually I will not go to detailed analysis, but from what I've seen in the last 20 years that I've watched NBA, your franchise player being a SG/SF/PF/C is much much more important than a PG.
Your PG should be able to do at least 2 out of these 3: Can distribute the ball with simplicity (like Billups), hit the 3 pointer with consistency, (like Fisher) or just be a great slasher with scoring ability and create open looks for teammates. and no, by this I'm not talking about ball dominating playmakers such as Deron and CP3.

All commentators, analysts on TV will tell how important it is to have a great distributor but I just can't find a correlation between Championship and those type of guys. Except maybe Kidd. But at the age of 39 he started not dominating the ball but and turning into a PG I just described in the upper paragraph.

what do you guys think?

just look at all those championship teams:

2012 Miami Heat - Star: Lebron James, PG: Chalmers
2011 Dallas Mavericks - Star: Nowitzki, PG: Kidd
2010 Los Angeles Lakers - Star: Kobe, PG: Fisher
2009 Los Angeles Lakers - Star: Kobe, PG: Fisher
2008 Boston Celtics - Star: Big3, PG: Rondo (remember he was just a role player with almost no impact)
2007 San Antonio Spurs - Star: Duncan, PG: Parker
2006 Miami Heat - Star: Wade, PG: Jason Williams
2005 San Antonio Spurs - Star: Duncan, PG: Parker
2004 Detroit Pistons - Star: Big4, PG: Billups
2003 San Antonio Spurs - Star: Duncan, PG: Parker
2002 Los Angeles Lakers - Star: Shaq, PG: Fisher
2001 Los Angeles Lakers - Star: Shaq, PG: Fisher
2000 Los Angeles Lakers - Star: Shaq, PG: Harper
1999 San Antonio Spurs - Star: Duncan, PG: Avery Johnson
1998 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: Harper
1997 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: Harper
1996 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: Harper
1995 Houston Rockets - Star: Hakeem, PG: Kenny Smith
1994 Houston Rockets - Star: Hakeem, PG: Kenny Smith
1993 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: BJ Armstrong
1992 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: Paxson
1991 Chicago Bulls - Star: MJ, PG: Paxson

[vinceWin]

There weren't as many good point guards back in the day than there are now.

[Woodsanity]

How many great playmaking PGs actually had a championship level cast in any of those years? Maybe Nash thats it.

[VUK1]

Stockton would've had a title or two, where it not for the G.O.A.T.

[tsherkin]

Stockton would've had a title or two, where it not for the G.O.A.T.

He wasn't the best player on his team, though, and the Jazz didn't get REALLY competitive until he started to play slightly fewer minutes and give the ball up a little more once they got Hornacek. Not that Stock was selfish or anything silly like that, but it balanced out their offense a little more having the ball move around more freely, which is one of the biggest problems with PGs: they're entirely too on-ball most of the time, and not in ways that really facilitate the team in the right ways under playoff defensive pressure.

There's a reason we almost never see guys dominating to deep playoff success from the 1, it takes a really special level of talent for that to happen and most of them don't combine a reasonable level of volume scoring with that volume playmaking, it's typically one or the other.

Playmaking PGs ARE valuable, just within reason and sensible implementation.

[MGrand15]

Everyone thinks a PG should be a classic pass-first playmaker when it's been proven that different types of PGs can be winners/great. Every PG that can score is "more of a 2" even if they've never played off-the-ball in their lives. I really don't understand the fascination with playmaking, pass-first PGs when in the frame work of a team, a PG that runs the offense isn't really necessary if you have other ball-handlers/playmakers.

[spudwebb]

Shaq's Lakers first two titles, Harper was the starting guard not rotten Fish.

[sabonis]

Shaq's Lakers first two titles, Harper was the starting guard not rotten Fish.

yeah a little too much copy-paste. I noticed I wrote Parker for 1999 as well, changed it.

How many great playmaking PGs actually had a championship level cast in any of those years? Maybe Nash thats it.

I'm not saying "A pass-first, ball dominating PG can never win" but just they are very overrated. In fact I might say having a great scorer and open-look creator is much more important than a pass first point guard, because when things get tough in the playoffs, a pass-first point guard will struggle but a true great scorer will carry you.

Everyone thinks a PG should be a classic pass-first playmaker when it's been proven that different types of PGs can be winners/great. Every PG that can score is "more of a 2" even if they've never played off-the-ball in their lives. I really don't understand the fascination with playmaking, pass-first PGs when in the frame work of a team, a PG that runs the offense isn't really necessary if you have other ball-handlers/playmakers.

that's what I was implying in the first post.

[donalddole]

If you lived through the 1980s and early 1990s and remember its obvious, everyone loved Magic Johnson. When a pass-first PG works it is really fun to watch, hence all the fans for Nash. Everyone is expecting the next Magic.

[Langdon Alger]

Everyone thinks a PG should be a classic pass-first playmaker when it's been proven that different types of PGs can be winners/great. Every PG that can score is "more of a 2" even if they've never played off-the-ball in their lives. I really don't understand the fascination with playmaking, pass-first PGs when in the frame work of a team, a PG that runs the offense isn't really necessary if you have other ball-handlers/playmakers.

I agree specifically with the bolded part. Wade came into the league as a PG (played PG his rookie year). But when the Heat realized that he's an elite scorer, they put him at the 2. For example in 06, eventhough Jason Williams and Payton were the PG, Wade was the real playmaker, essentially he was the PG. Same with Miami in 2012, Lebron and Wade played more "point" than Chalmers, who was used more as a shooter. Same with the Bulls, where Pippen and Jordan were essentially the PG, and Paxson and Armstrong were essentially shooters.

[Champ1on]

I think a PG is less important on teams with a bunch of people who can make passes. When they can't you really need some sort of distributor to get the ball to the guys who are open.

[Axel]

If you lived through the 1980s and early 1990s and remember its obvious, everyone loved Magic Johnson. When a pass-first PG works it is really fun to watch, hence all the fans for Nash. Everyone is expecting the next Magic.

I think this is the real answer.

[Ninjek]

Stockton would've had a title or two, where it not for the G.O.A.T.

He wasn't the best player on his team, though, and the Jazz didn't get REALLY competitive until he started to play slightly fewer minutes and give the ball up a little more once they got Hornacek. Not that Stock was selfish or anything silly like that, but it balanced out their offense a little more having the ball move around more freely, which is one of the biggest problems with PGs: they're entirely too on-ball most of the time, and not in ways that really facilitate the team in the right ways under playoff defensive pressure.

There's a reason we almost never see guys dominating to deep playoff success from the 1, it takes a really special level of talent for that to happen and most of them don't combine a reasonable level of volume scoring with that volume playmaking, it's typically one or the other.

Playmaking PGs ARE valuable, just within reason and sensible implementation.

Correct me if i'm wrong, because i didn't watch back then, but i thought common opinion was that stockton was a better player than malone on here? that's what i hear at least.

[wutevahung]

i think this is very easy to understand.

you have to score in order to win, not racking up total assists, and if a player does not possess the ability to score the ball with both superb efficiency and huge volume, and cannot single handedly change the defense, you are very limited.

Basically, if you are the best player on the team and you have to rely your teammates to make shots at all times, it is more likely that your team is not that good.

[ibraheim718]

Here's the problem with your argument... Every Phil Jackson coached team ran the triangle and the triangle doesn't rely on play making from the PG position... they don't handle the ball a lot... the guys who did handle the ball were what I called de facto PG's because they did everything PG's normally do in traditional systems.. Kobe, Mike, and Scottie all handled the ball and ran the offenses.. that's 11 of the 20 championship teams right there.

James you have to admit is the primary ball handler and play maker on the Miami team the way Wade was when the Heat won their first championship and Wade ran the point a lot at Marquette.. he knows how to take on the responsibilities. That's 2 more right there. And Rondo orchestrated the Celtics offense, sorry.. there's another one. Throw in Billups and there's 1 more. I'll let Parker slide even though his ability to score made the other parts of the job which he wasn't exactly great at much easier for him.

What you sound like you're trying to do is disparage the position which I think is ignorant if you just take those championship teams you ran off and go back and watch them again... you'll see that the PG's on those teams weren't just the smallest players.

[WVSArtist]

A good point guard is great, but doesn't have to be a point guard. Some of those teams had play makers in other positions.

[ThaRegul8r]

Stockton would've had a title or two, where it not for the G.O.A.T.

He wasn't the best player on his team, though, and the Jazz didn't get REALLY competitive until he started to play slightly fewer minutes and give the ball up a little more once they got Hornacek. Not that Stock was selfish or anything silly like that, but it balanced out their offense a little more having the ball move around more freely, which is one of the biggest problems with PGs: they're entirely too on-ball most of the time, and not in ways that really facilitate the team in the right ways under playoff defensive pressure.

There's a reason we almost never see guys dominating to deep playoff success from the 1, it takes a really special level of talent for that to happen and most of them don't combine a reasonable level of volume scoring with that volume playmaking, it's typically one or the other.

Playmaking PGs ARE valuable, just within reason and sensible implementation.

Correct me if i'm wrong, because i didn't watch back then, but i thought common opinion was that stockton was a better player than malone on here? that's what i hear at least.

I didn't know Stockton was the one winning MVPs. Evidently I must've missed something.

[Rerisen]

It just takes the right player being good enough. People go back to a superstar PG not winning since Magic, or Isiah, but prior to last year and Lebron winning with the Heat, you could have made the same criticism of Small Forwards going back to Larry Bird.

It's really hard to win titles, only one team wins each year, and many times the same teams win multiple times over a few years once they have a great great player. The champ usually comes from a team with a top 3 player in the league. Once there are more PGs in that top 3, you will see one prevail as the best player on a team eventually.

Whether it's a playmaking PG or a scoring PG, I would not bias to either way on your chances. Though there does still seem to be some stigma over the scoring type, which is misplaced.

[dho4ever]

Well 11 of those championships are coached by the great Phil Jackson, where the passing point guard position isn't used at all.

That's a big part of it.

[VC-INJURY]

I've said it a million times before, and I'll say it again. In order to build a championship team you need to either build around a star SG or C.

All the other players on the team just need to be complimentary pieces.

PF should just focus on rebounding and defense, they don't need to be a scorer
SF should be jack of all trades, solid perimeter defender and decent scorer (low to mid teens)
PG should be able to be average defender, pass and hit an open shot.

Look at almost every championship team and they either had a star SG or C.

With the rise in small ball over the past few years though this is all beginning to change as positional play is becoming less and less important.