Elite PG versus Elite C

Talk about sports like the NFL, MLB, NBA, NCAA, Fantasy, Boxing, MMA along with any other sports you follow.

What player type would you build a new team around?

Elite PG
7
70%
Elite C
3
30%
 
Total votes: 10

efthimios_rentzias
Pom pom fluffer
Pom pom fluffer
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:59 am

Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by efthimios_rentzias »

Pretend you have an expansion team, or a team that is the definition of lottery bad. Available at the top of the draft is either an Elite (def: once in a lifetime/once every 20 years) PG or an Elite C. Which one do you select to build your team around? Which one do you think instantly makes your team better?

Note that I believe that you can't win without one or the other, but I do believe that one is more important to have than the other, but I'd like to hear your thoughts first.

Paul B
All-American
All-American
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 9:45 am
Location: Hollywood, California

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by Paul B »

Man ole' Man, we have to pick one?

Okay, I'll choose a Point Guard. A PG sets the pace, sets the offense up, initiates the fast break, provides leadership, and helps put the center or forward in the proper position when that player is posting up on offense. I can't tell you how important it is to have a SMART PG in the NBA or college basketball in order to be successful.

College basketball is so dependent on the PG setting the pace of the game. In the NBA, a PG is an integral part of an offense and it is a bonus if they can average at least 15 points a game while handing out 10 assists.

Instead of running mindlessly up and down the court on the fastbreak, a PG knows when to control the pace and increase it when one has to. The "feel of the game" is dictated by the PG. An example of great point guards are "Magic" Johnson, John Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Derek Fisher, Tony Parker, Kenny Smith, Dennis Johnson, and many, many others (or point forwards in some cases --Scottie Pippen and Larry Bird for example).

User avatar
tavarua88
Hall of famer
Hall of famer
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:59 pm

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by tavarua88 »

I'd counter that list with Robinson, Chamberlain, Russell, Howard, Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Yao just off the top of my head. You can't train size. I think if you have a great C, you can get away with a marginal-good PG. Look at the Magic this season and the Hornets. That'd be the best example this year of a C vs a PG and how they make an impact on the team. As far as historically, I'd need to do more research, but I think a great C will always outweigh a great PG.
Paul B wrote:Man ole' Man, we have to pick one?

Okay, I'll choose a Point Guard. A PG sets the pace, sets the offense up, initiates the fast break, provides leadership, and helps put the center or forward in the proper position when that player is posting up on offense. I can't tell you how important it is to have a SMART PG in the NBA or college basketball in order to be successful.

College basketball is so dependent on the PG setting the pace of the game. In the NBA, a PG is an integral part of an offense and it is a bonus if they can average at least 15 points a game while handing out 10 assists.

Instead of running mindlessly up and down the court on the fastbreak, a PG knows when to control the pace and increase it when one has to. The "feel of the game" is dictated by the PG. An example of great point guards are "Magic" Johnson, John Stockton, Isaiah Thomas, Derek Fisher, Tony Parker, Kenny Smith, Dennis Johnson, and many, many others (or point forwards in some cases --Scottie Pippen and Larry Bird for example).

Paul B
All-American
All-American
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu May 03, 2007 9:45 am
Location: Hollywood, California

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by Paul B »

tavarua88 wrote:I'd counter that list with Robinson, Chamberlain, Russell, Howard, Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Yao just off the top of my head. You can't train size. I think if you have a great C, you can get away with a marginal-good PG. Look at the Magic this season and the Hornets. That'd be the best example this year of a C vs a PG and how they make an impact on the team. As far as historically, I'd need to do more research, but I think a great C will always outweigh a great PG.
Paul B wrote:
Center is the glamour position and usually gets more ink than the PG. Yao gets the ink while no one notices Aaron Brooks who set the pace in the 4th quarter and distributed the ball in the Houston win against the Lakers. Kareem didn't do so well with PG Norm Nixon but once Magic came on board, the championships began to come.

An exception to the rule in the case of the Center being a prominent figure could be the Chicago Bulls who had Bill Cartwright, Bill Wennington, and Luc Longley--considered average centers on a championship team. The guards (Jordan played point guard as well) and point forward were the focus of the team. Last year's Celtics had an average center in Kendrick Perkins but a team dominated by forwards and an exceptional PG.

User avatar
tavarua88
Hall of famer
Hall of famer
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:59 pm

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by tavarua88 »

My counter to that is Brooks was able to sneak in because Gasol/Bynum were too concerned to leave Yao to come and help defend. Plus Fisher's defense is attrocious, I'm surprised the Jazz didn't exploit that more in the first round, its essentially him letting his man beat him or flopping to take the charge.

We're only discussing PGs vs Cs right? that would take Jordan (who defies all rules) out of the equation. Hakeem, Ewing, Robinson, Shaq, Alonzo dominated those years when Jordan wasn't around. Avery Johnson was the PG for the Spurs when they won it. Lew Alcindor won a championship in Milwaukee before coming over to LA. The one constant in the Celtics run was Russell.
Paul B wrote:
Center is the glamour position and usually gets more ink than the PG. Yao gets the ink while no one notices Aaron Brooks who set the pace in the 4th quarter and distributed the ball in the Houston win against the Lakers. Kareem didn't do so well with PG Norm Nixon but once Magic came on board, the championships began to come.

An exception to the rule in the case of the Center being a prominent figure could be the Chicago Bulls who had Bill Cartwright, Bill Wennington, and Luc Longley--considered average centers on a championship team. The guards (Jordan played point guard as well) and point forward were the focus of the team. Last year's Celtics had an average center in Kendrick Perkins but a team dominated by forwards and an exceptional PG.

efthimios_rentzias
Pom pom fluffer
Pom pom fluffer
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by efthimios_rentzias »

You're forgetting with each of these teams that these big men had significant help at every position. The '93 and '94 Houston championship teams featured four and six double digit scorers respectively, with young-version Horry and Cassel on the bench, and 50-Greatest/Dream Team player Clyde Drexler on the second team.
1970 Milwaukee? Oscar Robertson, and three other players averaging 15, 18 and 19 ppg.
1994 Orlando? Penny averaging 20 and 7, and double digit scorers in Scott, Anderson and Grant.
1993 Knicks? Starks at 19 ppg, and double digits throughout the entire starting lineup.
1998 Knicks? Add Sprewell, Houston, Larry Johnson, with Camby on the bench.
Curiously enough, supreme big man Alcindor/Abdul had one big in-common in his championship years: the two undisputed greatest PGs of all-time, Oscar and Magic. And Magic took a Kareem-less Laker team back to the Finals with James Worthy.

The point being, an elite big man is a championship PIECE, not a championship building block, which is what an elite PG is. An elite PG can make all his teammates that much better. Analogized, an elite C is like the rest of the team, merely bullets that cannot be fired by the gun, aka the PG. I've played numerous teams in leagues with height and no PG, and a simple press was all it took to disrupt them.

Check this story out; tell me if you would rather have an elite big man or an elite PG.

Further cases in point, Amare Stoudemire/Shawn Marion without Steve Nash; the New Orleans Hornets being dominated by the Nuggets whose whole strategy was to eliminate CP3's influence (CP3's only big game in the series? Game 3, which the Hornets won); and your example of Aaron Brooks being the deciding factor once Yao was eliminated. It's harder to find elite PGs than elite big men, meaning there is higher chance of elite Cs matching up, than elite PGs matching up, meaning the elite PG is the advantage.

uhwarrior23
*True Sports Fan*
*True Sports Fan*
Posts: 30356
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 12:08 pm
MLB: Braves
NBA: Lakers
NFL: Pats
Location: Banning, CA
Contact:

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by uhwarrior23 »

Tough decision but I would roll w/ the Elite Center in the mold of a Shaq or a Dwight Howard.

User avatar
H20
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 12231
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 9:42 pm
MLB: Not a big fan of MLB.
NBA: Celtics
NFL: Falcons
Location: Waimea, Big Island - Cold Country, LOVE IT

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by H20 »

An elite C forces you to defend at very least one guy. An elite PG forces you to defend no less than the whole team.

efthimios_rentzias
Pom pom fluffer
Pom pom fluffer
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by efthimios_rentzias »

H20 wrote:An elite C forces you to defend at very least one guy. An elite PG forces you to defend no less than the whole team.
True story.
tavarua88 wrote:I think if you have a great C, you can get away with a marginal-good PG. Look at the Magic this season and the Hornets.
I hope you didn't just call CP3 a "marginal-good PG," or Tyson Chandler a "great C." I'll be interested to see the effect on the Magic of not having Rafer Alston (hello Anthony Johnson) running the point. Not only is he a good distributor/ 3-pt threat, he is a strong PG-on-PG defender.
tavarua88 wrote:My counter to that is Brooks was able to sneak in because Gasol/Bynum were too concerned to leave Yao to come and help defend. Plus Fisher's defense is attrocious, I'm surprised the Jazz didn't exploit that more in the first round, its essentially him letting his man beat him or flopping to take the charge.
1) Why would Gasol/Bynum be covering Brooks?
2) Elite PGs like CP3 and Deron Williams are also tremendous defenders. This is why an exception-to-the-rule team like the Lakers can afford to have such a shatty PG like Derek Fullback Fisher.
3) One person kept the Utah Jazz in the Lakers series: Deron Williams. Take him out of that equation, and you will see how badly that team suffers. The same goes for the Hornets. The drop-off is SIGNIFICANT without their elite PGs.

Now I will give you that a team is also not the same, and not as good if you take out an elite C like Shaq or Dwight Howard. BUT, if you take those two out of a team, the drop-off is not as significant as when you lose your elite PG. You have a team in disarray with a predictable offensive strategy and option: go to the big man. Now throw in an elite PG: everyone's a threat.

User avatar
tavarua88
Hall of famer
Hall of famer
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:59 pm

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by tavarua88 »

don't take words out of context, I'm saying if you have a great C, you do not need a great PG on the same team. Look at any championship team that has a great PG and dare you to find a team without a great big man (again Jordan exception). about the offense being predictable, that doesn't mean that its easily defendable, last I saw, that predictable offensive strategy won the Spurs three rings.

Addressing your points:
1) I never said they would be covering him directly, but I hope you heard the phrases of a "big man in the middle", protecting the paint, etc. My example was, if there's no Yao, chances are Bynum/Gasol can come over on the paint on defense and contest Brooks layup after he had blown by Fisher because there's no Yao in the paint to worry about, does Brooks have a wide open shot then? probably not. Yao presence opened up the lane for Brooks because it created a one on one situation.

2) Who won defensive player again this year? as far as your PGs, sure they are, they're tremendous defenders that can cover one guy, Howard covers the entire paint area, eliminates easy baskets opportunities, thereby dropping other teams' FG% because of his presence in the middle. Same applies to any great C.

3) take Dwight Howard out of the equation, does Jameer Nelson even get recognition? what if CP didn't have his buddy Chandler to alley-oop it to, how many assists does he get last year? Yao seems to do fine first with Alston and now with Lowry and Brooks, are those great PGs in your eyes? The drop off is huge if you lose a great C, teams don't have to worry about the inside presence on defense and rebounding if you don't have a big man.

You take the big man because there are so few of them in the league. Once you acquire a great C you have the advantage that 20 other teams don't. Look at every draft, it has always been based on height and their potential. Even though not all of them have panned out, you don't eliminate the possibility of drafting a guy with size. You can get a great PG much easier. Tony Parker was taken late, so was Deron. Every great big man was taken #1. John Stockton was taken #16, Mark Jackson? he was at 18. Nash? #15. Why was Magic taken #1? He was 6'9 guard that could play any position, including C, the key part being that he was 6'9! How many elite big men just came out of nowhere? you can look at the way teams build around their players, either build around a big C or a PG. Now, how many teams win built around a PG compared to those teams built around a C. How many times does a PG force a double team by the other defense compared to a C? you can't teach size.
efthimios_rentzias wrote:
H20 wrote:An elite C forces you to defend at very least one guy. An elite PG forces you to defend no less than the whole team.
True story.
tavarua88 wrote:I think if you have a great C, you can get away with a marginal-good PG. Look at the Magic this season and the Hornets.
I hope you didn't just call CP3 a "marginal-good PG," or Tyson Chandler a "great C." I'll be interested to see the effect on the Magic of not having Rafer Alston (hello Anthony Johnson) running the point. Not only is he a good distributor/ 3-pt threat, he is a strong PG-on-PG defender.
tavarua88 wrote:My counter to that is Brooks was able to sneak in because Gasol/Bynum were too concerned to leave Yao to come and help defend. Plus Fisher's defense is attrocious, I'm surprised the Jazz didn't exploit that more in the first round, its essentially him letting his man beat him or flopping to take the charge.
1) Why would Gasol/Bynum be covering Brooks?
2) Elite PGs like CP3 and Deron Williams are also tremendous defenders. This is why an exception-to-the-rule team like the Lakers can afford to have such a shatty PG like Derek Fullback Fisher.
3) One person kept the Utah Jazz in the Lakers series: Deron Williams. Take him out of that equation, and you will see how badly that team suffers. The same goes for the Hornets. The drop-off is SIGNIFICANT without their elite PGs.

Now I will give you that a team is also not the same, and not as good if you take out an elite C like Shaq or Dwight Howard. BUT, if you take those two out of a team, the drop-off is not as significant as when you lose your elite PG. You have a team in disarray with a predictable offensive strategy and option: go to the big man. Now throw in an elite PG: everyone's a threat.

efthimios_rentzias
Pom pom fluffer
Pom pom fluffer
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by efthimios_rentzias »

- The Spurs offensive strategy didn't start with Duncan. Duncan was an offensive OPTION who performed well. Just because you lead the team in scoring, doesn't mean that the team strategy is "go to X guy." The Spurs were a balanced team.

- Defensive player of the year is a traditionally big man award, and is biased the same way the Heisman always goes to QBs and RBs and not dominant linemen.

- PLEASE do not tell me Tyson Chandler MADE CP3. You can put Johann Petro or Kwame Brown or Darko Milicic in his spot and CP3 will make them 10x better. Tyson Chandler is FAR from an elite C, so please do not add him to this equation. For reference AGAIN, pls. see Stoudemire/Suns w/o Nash.

- Yao is a freak. So is Magic. Would you draft Yao #1 or Magic #1 if they were available at the top of the draft?

- The numbers are logic. There are fewer C's because... you need ONE on the floor. You need two Gs at minimum. By necessity, NBA teams will need to grab more guards than big men.

- Pointing out draft position to say, "Look how late you can get a great PG" is unfair. It's the draft. Only the few top 3 to 5 spots have near-guarantees on players. No one knows. I mean if we knew how people turned out pre-draft, would the Broncos have drafted the highest drafted player out of Hawaii, good ol Ashley Lelie? I digress, but the Nuggets took Efthimios Rentzias mid round. The draft is generally a dice roll, and the teams that ended up with great PGs lucked out.

Now, back to the forum topic, KNOWING you have an elite PG coming out of the draft, much like Magic and CP3, I think you take them and watch your ENTIRE team's value and ability increase. Anybody heard much about David West or Tyson Chandler before CP3? Paul Milsap anyone? PGs can bring out star quality in mediocre players by nature of their position. Fine, draft your elite C, and you have a guaranteed one good player. Now assuming teams decide to double your newly drafted elite C, then maybe your shooters and off-ball cutters benefit.
Grab yourself a Chauncey Billups and suddenly Clifford Robinson and Corliss Williamson matter. Suddenly, you beat the Lakers in the Finals with no 7-footers.
Or look at the Nuggets for that matter this year. One person difference. PG. Granted the point of the original post is instant improvement of an expansion or lottery-bad team, I believe the same would apply. A PG instantly upgrades the overall team value, while a C upgrades a single position.

User avatar
tavarua88
Hall of famer
Hall of famer
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:59 pm

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by tavarua88 »

really? so the offense the Spurs ran was not through Duncan...ok, I think the sanity just ended.
efthimios_rentzias wrote:- The Spurs offensive strategy didn't start with Duncan. Duncan was an offensive OPTION who performed well. Just because you lead the team in scoring, doesn't mean that the team strategy is "go to X guy." The Spurs were a balanced team.

- Defensive player of the year is a traditionally big man award, and is biased the same way the Heisman always goes to QBs and RBs and not dominant linemen.

- PLEASE do not tell me Tyson Chandler MADE CP3. You can put Johann Petro or Kwame Brown or Darko Milicic in his spot and CP3 will make them 10x better. Tyson Chandler is FAR from an elite C, so please do not add him to this equation. For reference AGAIN, pls. see Stoudemire/Suns w/o Nash.

- Yao is a freak. So is Magic. Would you draft Yao #1 or Magic #1 if they were available at the top of the draft?

- The numbers are logic. There are fewer C's because... you need ONE on the floor. You need two Gs at minimum. By necessity, NBA teams will need to grab more guards than big men.

- Pointing out draft position to say, "Look how late you can get a great PG" is unfair. It's the draft. Only the few top 3 to 5 spots have near-guarantees on players. No one knows. I mean if we knew how people turned out pre-draft, would the Broncos have drafted the highest drafted player out of Hawaii, good ol Ashley Lelie? I digress, but the Nuggets took Efthimios Rentzias mid round. The draft is generally a dice roll, and the teams that ended up with great PGs lucked out.

Now, back to the forum topic, KNOWING you have an elite PG coming out of the draft, much like Magic and CP3, I think you take them and watch your ENTIRE team's value and ability increase. Anybody heard much about David West or Tyson Chandler before CP3? Paul Milsap anyone? PGs can bring out star quality in mediocre players by nature of their position. Fine, draft your elite C, and you have a guaranteed one good player. Now assuming teams decide to double your newly drafted elite C, then maybe your shooters and off-ball cutters benefit.
Grab yourself a Chauncey Billups and suddenly Clifford Robinson and Corliss Williamson matter. Suddenly, you beat the Lakers in the Finals with no 7-footers.
Or look at the Nuggets for that matter this year. One person difference. PG. Granted the point of the original post is instant improvement of an expansion or lottery-bad team, I believe the same would apply. A PG instantly upgrades the overall team value, while a C upgrades a single position.

efthimios_rentzias
Pom pom fluffer
Pom pom fluffer
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 6:59 am

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by efthimios_rentzias »

I'll reset this.

The draft is tomorrow. You are the Sacramento Kings (or some other worst team). Magic Johnson is available. Wilt Chamberlain is available.

Which one do you draft?

User avatar
tavarua88
Hall of famer
Hall of famer
Posts: 2773
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 8:59 pm

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by tavarua88 »

pre or post Wilt rules? last i checked they didn't change any for Magic.

User avatar
Irse
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 14093
Joined: Sat Jun 26, 2004 8:06 pm
MLB: Cubs
NFL: Cowboys
Location: Mililani, HI

Re: Elite PG versus Elite C

Post by Irse »

I would say PG. A great one will make everyone better. Not so with a center. With today's rules, they can sort of zone him.
ImageImage

Post Reply