Smaller Players Do Not Win Championships

[Moranis]

Time and time again I see PG's overrated on this board and in the media.  Since the merger with the ABA, there has been just one team in which its best player (without much argument) was under 6'5" and that was the Isiah led Pistons.  One could argue about the recent Pistons title team, the Sonics in 79, or the Heat a few years back were led by a player under 6'5", though in each case you could easily argue the other way. 

If you look at the ten best PG's in NBA history, only two, Isiah and Magic won a title as their teams best player (Oscar was the #2 man for the Bucks for his one and only title, Cousy was the #2 man in 57 behind Sharman and just ahead of Tommy).  Of the great PG's of the recent generation (payton, kidd, nash, stockton, k. johnson, m. jackson, etc.) only Payton has a title and he had to piggyback on Shaq and Wade to get it.

That is not to say title teams have crap at the PG position, but the reality is if your PG is your best player, you aren't going to win a title and frankly most title teams the PG is the fourth or fifth best player on the team.

I bring this up mostly because I see a vast number of people that believe Rondo is the second coming and should essentially be off limits in trades.  Don't get me wrong, I like Rondo, and I don't think there is any realistic trade out there for Rondo, but I wouldn't second guess Ainge at all if he moved Rondo for a skilled player with size.

[johnnyrondo]

So if Rondo becomes a better player than each of the Big Three we should trade him, but if he doesn't we keep him?

[Truck Lewis]

maybe rondo shouldnt be "off limits",,,,so if we can trade him for what should be the "best player on a championship team" i dont think anyone would complain,,,but that is completely unlikely to happen and if you look at just a small sample (the last 25 years), that best player is a first ballot HOF besides that 04 pistons team

so yes, if we can trade rondo for the modern day equivalent of KG, Duncan, Wade, Shaq/Kobe, Jordan, Hakeem, Zeke, Magic, or Bird i would most certainly do it, but clearly defining someones tradeability based on who has won championships is out there.

The best players come in all shapes and they win because they are the best.  A lot of the champs from the past 25 featured guards that played dominant roles, Magic, Zeke, MJ, Kobe, Parker and Wade. If rondo comes even close to any of them, the first 4 in particular, i will be more than happy to keep him.

[the_Bird]

As went Rondo, went the C's.  No other player - not Pierce, not Ray, not Big Baby or Perk - had more of an impact on whether we won or lost games in the playoffs these last two seasons.

The addition of a premium PG is the quickest way to turn a mediocre team to a great team; think Kidd to New Jersey, or Nash to Phoenix, or CP3 to New Orleans.  A dominant big is the best kind of player to build around, since a KG/Dwight-type controls the whole defense.  On offense, the PG controls the ball for what, half the shot clock?  He either makes everyone better or makes them all worse.

The recent championship stats are skewed by the success that coattailer rider, Phil Jackson, has had in Chicago and LA.  Take away the triangle offense, the story may be different.  Jordan's six titles also skew recent history; he could have been playing with Jesus H. Christ and still be the best player on the court.

I'll posit that the question itself is flawed; my hypothesis is that who the SINGLE best player in a series is is irrelevant; the best player in last years' finals was Kobe, but you can always neutralize or contain ONE great player.  The key is to have the best two or three players; KG *and* Pierce *and* Ray Allen, or Jordan *and* Pippen, or Shaq *and* Kobe.  Why downgrade Cooz because he got to play with other Hall of Famers?  

We've also had a decade of pretty p----poor point guard play; Steve Francis being Stevie Franchise.  Seems like a whole generation of "elite" point guards who dominated the game and had a net negative impact on their teams; did Starbury ever HELP his teams win?  

The argument that I would agree with is that an elite big man helps a team more than an elite PG because they control so much of the defensive side, and defense equals wins.  BUT, the best way to make a good offense is not necessarily adding a scoring big man, but adding a PG like an in-the-prime-Kidd who makes everyone else better.

I think of it with a Patriots analogy from a few years back; KG's like when we added Ted Washington a few years back and immediately no one could run on us, and we won a title.  Rondo's like Brady, who made guys like Branch look like a Pro Bowler.  

[ToppersBsktball10]

Allen Iverson came close to one and he was the teams 1st 2nd 3rd 4th and 5th option and that was against Kobe and Shaq

[Moranis]

As went Rondo, went the C's.  No other player - not Pierce, not Ray, not Big Baby or Perk - had more of an impact on whether we won or lost games in the playoffs these last two seasons.

And we are getting ready to play the Cavs on Wednesday.  What you mean we lost?  Thanks for proving the point.

The addition of a premium PG is the quickest way to turn a mediocre team to a great team; think Kidd to New Jersey, or Nash to Phoenix, or CP3 to New Orleans.  A dominant big is the best kind of player to build around, since a KG/Dwight-type controls the whole defense.  On offense, the PG controls the ball for what, half the shot clock?  He either makes everyone better or makes them all worse.

Kidd, Nash, and Paul have exactly how many championships again.  Hell Kidd, Nash, and Paul have played in how many NBA Finals again?

The recent championship stats are skewed by the success that coattailer rider, Phil Jackson, has had in Chicago and LA.  Take away the triangle offense, the story may be different.  Jordan's six titles also skew recent history; he could have been playing with Jesus H. Christ and still be the best player on the court.

It wasn't the triangle offense, it was the most dominant center in basketball as well as a top 5 wing for the Lakers.  And for the Bulls it was the best player in the game (perhaps ever) with a top 50 all time player playing second fiddle.  All of them were over 6'5".  And realistically until Jordan, the Zeke Pistons were pretty much the only team to win a title led by someone under 6'9" (or however tall Magic was).  Jordan was just so [dang] good he overcame the size problem (I suspect we will see another player added to that list since only the Magic are led by a player 6'9" or taller).

I'll posit that the question itself is flawed; my hypothesis is that who the SINGLE best player in a series is is irrelevant; the best player in last years' finals was Kobe, but you can always neutralize or contain ONE great player.  The key is to have the best two or three players; KG *and* Pierce *and* Ray Allen, or Jordan *and* Pippen, or Shaq *and* Kobe.  Why downgrade Cooz because he got to play with other Hall of Famers?  

Again, which of those players was under 6'5"?  Ray Allen, the third best player on the Celtics, that's it.  Size = championships.

We've also had a decade of pretty ****-poor point guard play; Steve Francis being Stevie Franchise.  Seems like a whole generation of "elite" point guards who dominated the game and had a net negative impact on their teams; did Starbury ever HELP his teams win?

Payton, Kidd, and Nash are all first ballot HOFers.  The generation of PG's isn't nearly as bad as you make it seem.  The last generation had Magic, Zeke, and Stockton and that's it.

The argument that I would agree with is that an elite big man helps a team more than an elite PG because they control so much of the defensive side, and defense equals wins.  BUT, the best way to make a good offense is not necessarily adding a scoring big man, but adding a PG like an in-the-prime-Kidd who makes everyone else better.

Defense wins championships, not offense.  You once again are proving my point.

I think of it with a Patriots analogy from a few years back; KG's like when we added Ted Washington a few years back and immediately no one could run on us, and we won a title.  Rondo's like Brady, who made guys like Branch look like a Pro Bowler.  

Terrible analogy.  Rondo is no where near as important as Brady, which the rest of your post pretty much illustrates. 

[celticmaestro]

Sorry, he's small and won a championship. Not a PG, but small nonetheless (and may as well have been the PG in that team).

[the_Bird]

So what's your point?  Is Orlando going to give us Dwight Howard for Rondo?  I'll take a dominant big man anytime, but I'll take a game-changing PG second.  The Spurs don't win without Duncan, but they also don't win without Tony Parker.

[celticmaestro]

So what's your point?  Is Orlando going to give us Dwight Howard for Rondo?  I'll take a dominant big man anytime, but I'll take a game-changing PG second.  The Spurs don't win without Duncan, but they also don't win without Tony Parker.

And they definitely can't win without Manu Ginobili.

I think there's too much emphasis on positions. If you're good enough to win, you'll win, regardless of position or size.

[clover]

Rondo's agent is pitching for an extension, and this might be a good time to get him long term for quite a bit less than he'd command on the open market in a better economy a year later.

With Rondo locked up for sufficiently less than the max and Perk already a bargain, the C's could then focus on upgrading the size and talent of their front-court depth, because you're right they need to invest more there.

[crownsy]

Rondo's agent is pitching for an extension, and this might be a good time to get him long term for quite a bit less than he'd command on the open market in a better economy a year later.

With Rondo locked up for sufficiently less than the max and Perk already a bargain, the C's could then focus on upgrading the size and talent of their front-court depth, because you're right they need to invest more there.

I dunno how much under max were going to be getting rajon for, economy down or no.

I had hopes that we'd get him for 7-8 mill a year for 5 or 6, but i think that bird has flown with his playoff performance and newly found Q rating among NBA talking heads who seem to have stopped dismissing him as "the lucky kid who plays PG for the celtics"

I'd be pleasantly shocked if we don't overpay and go 10-12 mill for 6 at this point.

[CoachBo]

Rondo's agent is pitching for an extension, and this might be a good time to get him long term for quite a bit less than he'd command on the open market in a better economy a year later.

With Rondo locked up for sufficiently less than the max and Perk already a bargain, the C's could then focus on upgrading the size and talent of their front-court depth, because you're right they need to invest more there.

I dunno how much under max were going to be getting rajon for, economy down or no.

I had hopes that we'd get him for 7-8 mill a year for 5 or 6, but i think that bird has flown with his playoff performance and newly found Q rating among NBA talking heads who seem to have stopped dismissing him as "the lucky kid who plays PG for the celtics"

I'd be pleasantly shocked if we don't overpay and go 10-12 mill for 6 at this point.

I am not interested in Rondo at $12 large until he develops an outside shot and defends night in and night out. At that price, I'll wait a year.

[crownsy]

Rondo's agent is pitching for an extension, and this might be a good time to get him long term for quite a bit less than he'd command on the open market in a better economy a year later.

With Rondo locked up for sufficiently less than the max and Perk already a bargain, the C's could then focus on upgrading the size and talent of their front-court depth, because you're right they need to invest more there.

I dunno how much under max were going to be getting rajon for, economy down or no.

I had hopes that we'd get him for 7-8 mill a year for 5 or 6, but i think that bird has flown with his playoff performance and newly found Q rating among NBA talking heads who seem to have stopped dismissing him as "the lucky kid who plays PG for the celtics"

I'd be pleasantly shocked if we don't overpay and go 10-12 mill for 6 at this point.

I am not interested in Rondo at $12 large until he develops an outside shot and defends night in and night out. At that price, I'll wait a year.

Me too, but i bet we (the celtics) don't wait.

[CoachBo]

Considering the issues that have developed with Rondo's effort - and the over-hype of what actually was a very uneven playoff performance - overpaying him would be a mistake that threatens the quality of his career.

There are too many questions about his attitude right now to overpay. I am not at all interested in extending him over $8 million annually until he fills in the gaps in his game.

[BballTim]

Time and time again I see PG's overrated on this board and in the media.  Since the merger with the ABA, there has been just one team in which its best player (without much argument) was under 6'5" and that was the Isiah led Pistons.  One could argue about the recent Pistons title team, the Sonics in 79, or the Heat a few years back were led by a player under 6'5", though in each case you could easily argue the other way. 

If you look at the ten best PG's in NBA history, only two, Isiah and Magic won a title as their teams best player (Oscar was the #2 man for the Bucks for his one and only title, Cousy was the #2 man in 57 behind Sharman and just ahead of Tommy).  Of the great PG's of the recent generation (payton, kidd, nash, stockton, k. johnson, m. jackson, etc.) only Payton has a title and he had to piggyback on Shaq and Wade to get it.

That is not to say title teams have crap at the PG position, but the reality is if your PG is your best player, you aren't going to win a title and frankly most title teams the PG is the fourth or fifth best player on the team.

I bring this up mostly because I see a vast number of people that believe Rondo is the second coming and should essentially be off limits in trades.  Don't get me wrong, I like Rondo, and I don't think there is any realistic trade out there for Rondo, but I wouldn't second guess Ainge at all if he moved Rondo for a skilled player with size.

  Can we win a title with Rondo as our best player? Unlikely. Can we win a title i he's one of our top 3 players? Yes, if we have the right pieces. How many teams have won the title with their best player being a small forward? The list is pretty short beyond Bird. Does that mean that players like Pippen, Worthy, Dr J and Pierce were unnecessary? If you trade Rondo for a big you'll go downhill in terms of skill and impact level and that will put you farther from winning a title.