Position doesn't matter (for championships)

by Gargen on May 24, 2008 1:02 AM PDT

There has been a lot of discussion lately about which positions "win championships". Conventional wisdom has always been that big men win championships. Over the past several years, there has been a big counter movement that it's actually guards that win championships.

During the early years of the NBA, the former was almost certainly true. If you had a top 7 footer, there were only a couple other teams in the league that really had any chance of defending you. There's a reason that Wilt averaging over 50 points and 25 rebounds per game one year seems so unimaginable today. In today's league, almost every team has, at the very least, a couple defensively competent big men. The addition of the 3-pt line also swings the power away from the big guys. Now shooting 40% from range is just as valuable as shooting 60% under the rim... and that's not even counting all the changes the NBA has made over the years to help space out the game for quick guards (hand check rules anyone?).

So what about those guards then. Are they taking over the championships? Three of the last four Finals MVPs were guards... but lets take a look at all of the dominant teams since 1980 (implementation of the 3-pt line and talent levels are comparable to today). Dominant teams is defined as three or more chamionships:

80s Lakers - Led by PG (Magic Johnson)
80s Celtics - Led by SF (Larry Bird)
90s Bulls - Led by SG (Michael Jordan)
00s Lakers - Led by C (Shaquille O'Neal)
00s Spurs - Led by PF/C (Tim Duncan)

So that's two two votes for guards and two votes for big men and... wait a second... how did a SF sneak in to this one? That's pretty inconclusive so lets look at the other teams that won championships:

Bad Boy Pistons - Led by PG (Isiah Thomas)
Mid 90s Rockets - Led by C (Hakeen Olajuwon)
'83 76s - Led by C (Moses Malone)
'04 Pistons - Led by... PF or PG depending on who you ask
'06 Heat - Led by SG (Dwayne Wade)

That's 2.5 more votes for big men and 2.5 more votes for the guards.

Of course none of those "led by" players above did it alone. Magic has some pretty good big men on his teams (Kareem/Worthy) and Shaq got some help from a SG that's done pretty well so far. Also, we can't forget that last year's finals MVP wasn't Duncan, it was Parker and the Bulls teams never really needed dominant big man. They always had a hard-nosed cleanup man (Horace Grant/Dennis Rodman), but never a true dominant big man. On the flip side though, the 80s Celtics were front loaded with the big three being SF/PF/C. Sure, Danny Ainge and Dennis Johnson didn't suck, but nobody would mistake them for irreplaceable keys to their championship runs.

The common theme here is that you NEED a dominant player, and if you don't want to wait on a down year, another dominant player or two is a good idea, but it doesn't matter what position they play a long as the rest of the team is competent. Good news LeBron, you aren't doomed to never win a championship because the best player on your team will never be a PF/C or a guard.

4 recs | Comment 13 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Blogger

You forgot the importance of a dominant blogger.

Good post though.

—Dave

by Dave on May 24, 2008 1:05 AM PDT 0 recs

Yeah, having a Blazer fan as the NBA blogger over at ESPN probably helps

by Gargen on May 24, 2008 1:17 AM PDT up 0 recs

I've been out bear hunting

Now I’m back and trying to read everybody’s stuff. Holy Moly there are a lot of recent posts, but this one is the best I’ve read tonight.

I haven’t seen any post of the week awards recently. If we are still doing that I would nominate this post.

I would expand to say you need a dominant player and you need another all star…. I mean look

Celtics had other all stars
Showtime Lakers had other all stars
Rockets had a young Sam Cassell & Robert Horry who were both clutch
Bulls even had another obvious all star
Bad BoyPistons had an elite defensive big (Rodman) to go with 2 premier guards
2000 Lakers had two dominant stars
Spurs have had at least 4 different position All Stars maybe 5 with Sean Elliot

Detroit is the much talked about exception that lacked a one dominant player, but they had what 3-4 all stars?

Best case for the Blazers to fit the championship mold:

Oden dominant
Roy & LMA All Stars.

by tweener on May 24, 2008 1:28 AM PDT 0 recs

Although position might not ultimately matter,

There are some advantages to building around a star center or point guard. Although it didn’t quite work out, Carter was giddy when he learned he was going to play with Kidd. And having a dominant big man makes everyone’s job easier.

by MGNNoah on May 24, 2008 9:21 AM PDT 0 recs

Like your thinking

Essentially there isn’t a formula for which positions you have to be strong at in order to win a championship. The formula is, you need guys who can score and guys who can rebound and guys who can stop the other team from scoring in any combination of positions. I think we are putting together a groups of guys that are going to be able to accomplish those three things.

Score – Roy, Aldridge, Webster, Travis, not to mention Oden and Rudy
Rebound – Oden, Joel, Aldridge, Outlaw as a SF
Defend – Oden, Joel, Aldridge, Roy

Having Oden and Joel will provide the depth in the frontcourt that we seriously lacked last year. They will dominate on the boards for 48 minutes.

Roy and Aldridge will dominate on offense with Oden cleaning up their misses and Outlaw providing punch off the bench.

The Blazers were not horrible on defense, they just lacked a dominant presence. Enter GO.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on May 24, 2008 10:31 AM PDT 0 recs

True

If you can get scoring, rebounding and defending from your group as a whole, it doesn’t matter from which position it comes from. So I guess in theory if you had a team of 5 6’1” PGs that could somehow rebound and defend the big boys you could win a championship with that crew.

by tingeyga on May 24, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up 0 recs

In theory, sure

My point was you don’t have to have a specific combination of dominant players filling specific positions to win a title. You need players that produce specific results on the court no matter what their positions are. It was a response to people who think we need an all-star point guard (allegedly Rose) and not an all-star PF (allegedly LMA) and a ditto to Gargen. Position is not as important as production.

Although I might also have to agree with Dave that a dominant blogger is the key to any contender. I just hope Dave is at least 6’1”.

PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04

by tssbro on May 24, 2008 2:31 PM PDT up 0 recs

LaBron is a Small Forward...

And I am guessing that he will be the leader of a Championship team some time in the next Six years.

by Portland Dynasty on May 24, 2008 10:53 AM PDT 0 recs

Only if he joins the Blazers...

by trk on May 24, 2008 11:18 AM PDT up 0 recs

Oh yes,

I like that thinking.

by The Graduate on May 25, 2008 5:16 AM PDT up 0 recs

I think it's all about the GM

It’s the guy who puts together all the things mentioned above, that gets you them there championships.

PS. I think KP is slipping. I haven’t heard him mention “culture” in months.

Four

by tominhawaii on May 25, 2008 3:04 PM PDT 0 recs

That's 'cuz we're about to add

Mayo (draft)
Baron Davis (He’ll opt out and sign with us)
Carmelo (trade)
Ruben Patterson (taking Bill Bayno’s job)

Book it.

Current team + Greg + Rudy = Blazers losing narrowly to the Spurs in the 2008-2009 Western Conference Finals. Book it.

by prezofdeath on May 25, 2008 8:40 PM PDT up 0 recs

Good analysis

Position matters:
1. You have to be able to put a team on the floor that won’t be killed by a dominant center. You don’t have to have that guy yourself, but you have to be able to defend him somewhat.
2. You have to be able to overcome a team packing it in on you. To do this, you either need excellent outside shooting or a big man who can score on them anyway (like Kareem/Akeem/Shaq).
3. You need an inside threat on offense to prevent teams cheating by getting in the face of all your shooters. This can be a big man who will punish teams that don’t double team him, or you can have a couple of smaller men (PG/wings) who will drive it to the hole.
4. You need, generally, a dominant player, and another All-Star, but position doesn’t matter. Ideally, you want two dominant players. Ideally, you’re two top players provide both an inside and outside threat.

We have a probable dominant inside player (Oden), an All-Star (and potentially dominant) outside/inside threat in Roy, and a probable All-Star inside/outside threat in Aldridge.

Beyond that, you need good role players. That’s it.

Other people don't have as much practice at being wrong as I do -- HT, timbo

by jscot on May 27, 2008 6:35 AM PDT 0 recs