The Golden Era of Point Guards

[AboveLegit]

http://static.foxsports.com/content/fscom/img/2011/12/31/123011-NBA-Bulls-Clippers-PI_20111231024815595_660_320.JPG

For the past 3 or 4 decades, we have noticed a trend intensifying around the league, a trend that has fluctuated from decade to decade. It seems as if there’s a new breed of great players at a specific position entering the league at once, and while we could hardly consider this a misfortune, we are quick to detect what this young decade has to offer.

 

The 1980’s had a plethora of great SF’s, and at one point it seemed as if every team featured a SF that brought something unique to the table. You had SF’s that posted up such as Adrian Dantley and Bernard King, SF’s that ran the court well such as James Worthy and Alex English, and of course the athletic freaks, Dominique Wilkins and Julius Erving. And let’s not forget the legend himself, Larry Bird. The 1990’s featured great big men such as Hakeem Olajuwon, a young Shaquille O’Neal, Charles Barkley, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, Karl Malone, among many others. This most recent decade, the 2000’s featured what I like to call, the “disciples of Michael Jordan.” Proceeding his retirement from the Chicago Bulls, many were anxious to find “the next Mike.” Grant Hill, Vince Carter, Tracy McGrady, and probably the only one to legitimately hold a candle to His Airness, Kobe Bryant were all proclaimed the next Jordan at one point.

 

But now we move onto the era of the point guard, perhaps the most critical and most under duress player on the hardwood. We have entered this decade with an array of great talent at this position, all of which bring something new to the table.

 

1. Chris Paul

Quite possibly the best PG the league has seen since Isiah Thomas, CP3 has quickly transcended himself in rarified air. It’s not often we see a player as deadly efficient as Paul, one that is so meticulous with the ball he’s able to control the entire pace of the game. He has posted a PER of 22.0 or higher in each of his 7 seasons in the league, and is already in the top 10 all time for his entire career. Los Angeles didn’t exactly trade the house for Paul, but they relinquished much of their future in order to win now, and I’d say it’s paying off. With convincing victories over the Heat and Lakers, it’s clear that this team belongs in the West’s upper echelon, and will continue to grow as a unit. The effect he’s had on this team thus far hasn’t gone unnoticed, he has gotten Blake Griffin easier buckets which is demonstrated by his increase in FG%, and has transformed this team into a top 5 offense in the NBA. Despite all of the injuries Paul has dealt with in the past, he looks to have a great career ahead of him as his playing style won’t be affected much with age. The way he uses his hips and shoulders in order to create space as well as his dribbling ability will not fade; he’s very much cut from the Steve Nash/Jason Kidd mold.

 

2. Derrick Rose

Coming off a historic season in which Rose captured MVP honors as the youngest player ever, 2012 projects to be another year of steady improvement for the 4th year superstar. He didn’t exactly come out of the gates swinging following an extended lockout; yes he dropped the game winner on the Los Angeles Lakers in the season opener, but appears more relaxed and patient. This is an appeasing sign for Chicago natives who witnessed a playoff collapse by the #1 seed in the east. The team’s heavy reliance on Rose, especially on offense, led to their demise against the Miami Heat, so it has been a point of emphasis for them to provide the reigning MVP with more support. 4 games into the season, we began to witness more of the same, another down year for Carlos Boozer, a rather disappointing start for Joakim Noah, and an injury riddled season for newly acquired Richard Hamilton forced Derrick Rose to revert back to his MVP ways. He has looked more confident as a play maker in the offense, has played with more patience, and believe it or not, is looking to pass earlier in the shot clock. His scoring percentages are down; he’s not scoring with efficiency, but is still leading Chicago to a 12-3 record, best in the East.

 

3. Deron Williams

Is there a superstar more underrated and underappreciated in this league than Deron Williams? Is there a superstar in a more tumultuous position than Deron Williams? Quite often compared to his counterpart and good friend Chris Paul, it truly seems like both of their worlds flipped for better or worse in the past year. You could say Deron wasn’t in the most ideal position in Utah, but was still able to find a good amount of success there. However the exact opposite has happened since being traded to the impending Brooklyn Nets. No matter how great of a point guard you are, you will never find individual success without a reliable second option, and Deron has none in New Jersey. You cannot point to one starter on that team and say he is worthy of starting on a championship caliber team other than Deron. The result has been a career low in field goal percentage, 8 apg (lowest since his rookie season), and a career high of 4 turnovers per game. On top of that, he looks genuinely disinterested games, is taking far too many perimeter oriented jumpers, and isn’t attacking the basket like he use to. Regardless of his struggles this season, he remains a top 3 PG based strictly off his proven ability to play at a superstar level when given half decent players around him.

 

4. Rajon Rondo

His free throw percentages are an abomination to point guards everywhere, his infrequently taken three point shots are more likely to hit the shot clock than the rim, and his teammates being three future hall of famers do him no justice. These indictments of Rajon Rondo, concerns that prove without a shadow of a doubt that he’s not a superstar, are all reasons to appreciate his game more. His restricted ability in the half court set and defenders literally daring him to shoot the ball aren’t exactly aesthetically pleasing, but showcases how one can dominate a game without scoring. He’s the undisputed best player on that Celtics roster, his role on the team is virtually irreplaceable because there’s only a handful of players in this league can do what he’s done for the past 3 years. He has one of the highest basketball IQ’s in the league, his pinpoint passing and ability to control the tempo of a game are all reasons why he’s a perfect fit in Boston. He's not a product of his teammates or system, but more a product of circumstances. Ray Allen doesn't have to create for others, Pierce doesn't have to carry the load on offense, and Garnett doesn't have to do everything on the defensive end, similarly, Rondo doesn't have to score and has the freedom to egregiously gun for the assist record. He fits in perfectly with what Doc is trying to establish (or better yet, already has established), and in turn, makes Boston a more well rounded team. They're simply a team greater than the sum of its parts, much like the situation Billups fell into back in '06, or even Garnett in '08.

 

5. Steve Nash

The age old question of “When is Steve Nash going to decline?” can be put to rest, or better yet, should have been put to rest last season when he led the league in assists per game at the age of 36. As you grow older, you lose your athleticism, not your ability to shoot or pass the ball, just ask John Stockton. What Steve Nash is doing so far this year, in just 30 minutes per game with limited weapons on offense, is truly a work of art. Some people can criticize his body of work for playing in one system his entire career, but there’s no denying that he’s one of the greatest shooters and passers the league has ever seen.

[Nitro]

Nice article, though it seems to abruptly end and kinda lacks a point (pun completely intended).

 

Aside from the guys you mention; Curry, Westbrook, Nelson, Rubio, Parker, Holliday, Lawson, Lowry, Felton, Augustine, Collison, Irving....this league is stacked with talent at the PG position. It's pretty crazy.

 

Oh, and Paul the best PG since Thomas? I'd put prime Kidd, Payton, Nash and Stockton at least on the same level as Thomas, if not better. Same goes for Paul.

[YugoRocketsFan]

Lowry should honestly been in the top 5.

 

17.3 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 8.7 apg, and 2.2 steals per game

 

Shooting 42% from 3 point and 90% from the line.

 

Those are elite numbers.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Come at me bro

[Guru]

 

Oh, and Paul the best PG since Thomas? I'd put prime Kidd, Payton, Nash and Stockton at least on the same level as Thomas, if not better. Same goes for Paul.

I agree.

 

I also like the fact that you put Nash ahead of Westbrook. From what I have seen from Nash this year, he still has it. He's still one of the best playmakers in the league.

[AboveLegit]

Nice article, though it seems to abruptly end and kinda lacks a point (pun completely intended).

Haha thanks man, this was really just about the top 5 PG's in the league, and I tried to expand the idea, guess it didn't work it the way I thought it would.

 

Oh, and Paul the best PG since Thomas? I'd put prime Kidd, Payton, Nash and Stockton at least on the same level as Thomas, if not better. Same goes for Paul.

This is completely based off talent rather than body of work, I just believe what Paul has been able to do in his career with such little talent is remarkable. Not to mention the fact that he's never gone below 22.0PER in his whole career says a lot about how good he is. Obviously guys like Nash and Kidd have more to their resume, but Paul is the better individual talent.

[AboveLegit]

Lowry should honestly been in the top 5.

 

17.3 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 8.7 apg, and 2.2 steals per game

 

Shooting 42% from 3 point and 90% from the line.

 

Those are elite numbers.

Those are elite numbers, but he's still breaking out, you really can't put him ahead of more established PG's like Nash and Rondo.

[YugoRocketsFan]

Those are elite numbers, but he's still breaking out, you really can't put him ahead of more established PG's like Nash and Rondo.

 

Yes you can.

[AboveLegit]

Yes you can.

Care you elaborate?

[Nitro]

This is completely based off talent rather than body of work, I just believe what Paul has been able to do in his career with such little talent is remarkable. Not to mention the fact that he's never gone below 22.0PER in his whole career says a lot about how good he is. Obviously guys like Nash and Kidd have more to their resume, but Paul is the better individual talent.

 

I wasn't comparing Nash, Stockton and Kidd to Paul, I was comparing them to Thomas.

[YugoRocketsFan]

Care you elaborate?

 

He has no weaknesses in his game.

 

Steve Nash can't carry a team, and also cannot play any defense where Lowry excels.

 

Rondo and Lowry are pretty much the same when it comes to playmaking, rebounding and defense but Lowry can carry a team, and shoot way better. Lowry shoots 90% from free throws while Rondo shoots barely 60. Lowry is also 42% from behind the 3 point line, while Rondo is at 33%

[Nitro]

Steve Nash can't carry a team, and also cannot play any defense where Lowry excels.

 

Huh? Nash has carried plenty of teams in the past, and he's the same player as he was back then. Lowry hasn't even made an all-star team, and thus far he's yet to prove he can carry a team anywhere as the #1 guy.

 

Rondo and Lowry are pretty much the same when it comes to playmaking, rebounding and defense but Lowry can carry a team, and shoot way better. Lowry shoots 90% from free throws while Rondo shoots barely 60. Lowry is also 42% from behind the 3 point line, while Rondo is at 33%

 

Agree with everything but the playmaking...Rondo is without a doubt the better playmaker than Lowry. Better vision, more capable of making certain passes, and can control tempo better than Lowry.

[YugoRocketsFan]

Huh? Nash has carried plenty of teams in the past, and he's the same player as he was back then. Lowry hasn't even made an all-star team, and thus far he's yet to prove he can carry a team anywhere as the #1 guy.

 

 

 

Agree with everything but the playmaking...Rondo is without a doubt the better playmaker than Lowry. Better vision, more capable of making certain passes, and can control tempo better than Lowry.

 

In the past? As of now hes way more skilled than Steve Nash. He is also definitely the reason why the Rockets competed with the Lakers in the second round.

 

I wouldn't say Rondo is without a doubt the playmaker, Lowry's assisting has been amazing this season and has been making passes I have not even seen from him before. Watch a few more games and you'll see the difference from last year and now, he has broken out but he's not on a hot streak of any kind, he is just showing his true potential right now as the #1 option of the Rockets.

[Flash]

I always have a hard time comparing today's great PG's with the great ones of the past because while you have to respect what those guys did back in the day, the athletes in the NBA today are on a completely different level than before. It would be pretty awesome to see how a guy like Rose would do in the 80's NBA game.

[AboveLegit]

I wasn't comparing Nash, Stockton and Kidd to Paul, I was comparing them to Thomas.

I guess you can put Kidd in that same boat, but not Stockton and Nash...

 

The offense that Sloan used in Utah generated a lot of assists for the point guard, using either the pick and roll (which Utah used during Stockton's years more than any other team ever) and set plays that require the player receiving the ball to shoot immediately after he's gotten it. You'd also be hard pressed to find many moments where Stockton absolutely controlled a game. Sure he was able to hit shots in the clutch, but you almost assured that he would get his 16 to 17 points a game and 12 to 13 assists a game, but never was able to take over a game the way you see Nash or Paul doing.

 

Nash is a dropoff after those 3 because his lack of defense. That's a major knock on him.

[AboveLegit]

I always have a hard time comparing today's great PG's with the great ones of the past because while you have to respect what those guys did back in the day, the athletes in the NBA today are on a completely different level than before. It would be pretty awesome to see how a guy like Rose would do in the 80's NBA game.

While the athletes are superior today, the big men were definitely more skilled in the past. Guys like Rose would have to alter their games to fit that playing style, you can't drive on guys like Ewing, Olajuwon, etc on a consistent basis.

[Nitro]

In the past? As of now hes way more skilled than Steve Nash. He is also definitely the reason why the Rockets competed with the Lakers in the second round.

 

Right now Nash is surrounded by garbage. Put him on the Rockets with weapons like Martin and Scola and they'd without a doubt be a playoff team. His skill hasn't diminished from just 2 years ago when he was the #1 player on a WCF team (one that lost to the eventual champs). He is still arguably the most dangerous offensive player in the game.

 

BTW, Lowry averaged 5/3/2 with 33% shooting that post-season. Brooks, Artest, Scola and Landry were all undoubtedly more important pieces in that 2nd round. Battier, too, for his defense on Kobe.

 

Lowry is a career 77% shooter from the FT line, and 33% from 3. This season has been an extremely small sample size. Can he keep 91% and 42% averages up? We know Nash can put up big numbers and sustain them with great efficiency. I am not ready to say Lowry can do the same.

 

I wouldn't say Rondo is without a doubt the playmaker, Lowry's assisting has been amazing this season and has been making passes I have not even seen from him before. Watch a few more games and you'll see the difference from last year and now, he has broken out but he's not on a hot streak of any kind, he is just showing his true potential right now as the #1 option of the Rockets.

 

I've seen 3 games from the Rockets this season, and I am hugely impressed with Lowry...but he is not a better distributor than Rondo. He doesn't have the same vision or ability. And I certainly wouldn't take him over Nash yet. That is not a slight of Lowry, it's just that I have to see a lot more than a dozen games of him playing at this level.

[Flash]

While the athletes are superior today, the big men were definitely more skilled in the past. Guys like Rose would have to alter their games to fit that playing style, you can't drive on guys like Ewing, Olajuwon, etc on a consistent basis.

 

I just feel like Rose and Paul would dominate in an generation of ball. Rose's athleticism is something that was rarely seen out of a PG back then and Paul's precision and overall game might be the best in a PG we've seen aside from Magic and maybe Gary Payton.

 

These guys are also facing zone defenses from time to time which is something those other guys back then never really needed to go against.

[AboveLegit]

I just feel like Rose and Paul would dominate in an generation of ball. Rose's athleticism is something that was rarely seen out of a PG back then and Paul's precision and overall game might be the best in a PG we've seen aside from Magic and maybe Gary Payton.

 

These guys are also facing zone defenses from time to time which is something those other guys back then never really needed to go against.

Good point there, I have no doubt the PG's I listed in the article would play just as well in a different era, however, you're minimizing the importance of great post play. It makes operating an offense more difficult because you don't have the lane you normally would receive in todays game.

[Flash]

Good point there, I have no doubt the PG's I listed in the article would play just as well in a different era, however, you're minimizing the importance of great post play. It makes operating an offense more difficult because you don't have the lane you normally would receive in todays game.

 

True, but depending on how the game is officiated, a guy like Rose would LIVE at the FT line going up against generally slower, less athletic PG's than he sees today. Not to mention I think his athleticism and finishing ability gives him a shot against some of those guys. Definitely agree though with your point about better post players but IMO that can worked around if you have a guy as talented as Rose.

[Nitro]

I guess you can put Kidd in that same boat, but not Stockton and Nash...

 

The offense that Sloan used in Utah generated a lot of assists for the point guard, using either the pick and roll (which Utah used during Stockton's years more than any other team ever) and set plays that require the player receiving the ball to shoot immediately after he's gotten it. You'd also be hard pressed to find many moments where Stockton absolutely controlled a game. Sure he was able to hit shots in the clutch, but you almost assured that he would get his 16 to 17 points a game and 12 to 13 assists a game, but never was able to take over a game the way you see Nash or Paul doing.

 

Nash is a dropoff after those 3 because his lack of defense. That's a major knock on him.

 

Isiah Thomas is grossly overrated. He filled up the stat sheet early in his career, but it didn't result in wins. He was a 4+ TO guy and scored quite inefficiently (below .520 TS% for his career). When he toned it back offensively, his team finally won. And let's not make believe that he was some game-changing defender...he never made an All-Defensive team in his career.

 

Yes, Stockton was placed in an offense that maximized his talents, but give me his ability to efficiently run an offense, and get his 16-17PPG on high percentages over Thomas. Defensively, you can also make a strong case for Stockton being the better player as well.

 

Nash is a dropoff defensively, but the difference between he and Thomas offensively is pretty big as well.

[Flash]

What would guys' all time list look like? I think the top 3 goes Magic and then Payton and Paul are interchangeable IMO. I know he doesn't have the accolades that Nash and Kidd have but IMO he's a better player than either of them if you have all 3 of them in their primes.

[Nitro]

What would guys' all time list look like? I think the top 3 goes Magic and then Payton and Paul are interchangeable IMO. I know he doesn't have the accolades that Nash and Kidd have but IMO he's a better player than either of them if you have all 3 of them in their primes.

 

Depends on how you're ranking them. By careers, I'd probably go Magic, Oscar, Nash, Payton, Kidd. Last 3 can be interchangable, they're very close.

[AboveLegit]

If you want to argue accolades here, Stockton only made the NBA first team twice (as many times as Nash and two fewer than Kidd). He only finished in the top 10 of MVP voting twice. No one's going argue career stats, but a lot of that has to do with the fact that he played until he was 40 (and if Magic's career hadn't ended at 31, the numbers would've been a little bit different). His career records have as much to do with longevity as they have to do with talent.

 

It should also be pointed out that Stockton rarely stepped it up in the playoffs. Most of his stats either stay about same as they were in the regular season or for most seasons dropped (sometimes significantly). In fact his career field goal percentage drops about 5% in the playoffs. He never had a stand out game when things were on the line in fact, in the last series against the Bulls in the 98 playoffs he was absolutely dreadful, either failing or barely able to break double figures in points or assists. You could credit that to the Bulls defense, but normally you want your Hall of Fame point guard to step up his game when it matters most.

 

What we know of Isiah is that he was the best guy on a team that won back to back titles that consistently stepped up when it mattered. I'll agree that his defense at times gets overrated because he had one heck of a post defense to rely on, but I'd still take his D over Stockton's. His Pistons teams didn't start to win when he changed his style of play, but rather when the franchise changed it's philosophy on defense by drafting Rodman and Salley, and picking up Mahorn.

[Nitro]

What we know of Isiah is that he was the best guy on a team that won back to back titles that consistently stepped up when it mattered. I'll agree that his defense at times gets overrated because he had one heck of a post defense to rely on, but I'd still take his D over Stockton's. His Pistons teams didn't start to win when he changed his style of play, but rather when the franchise changed it's philosophy on defense by drafting Rodman and Salley, and picking up Mahorn.

 

Meh...I think Payton, Nash, Stockton and Paul would have won championships with those teams (Kidd probably not because he was never the scorer Thomas was). As I said before, he was a very inefficient scorer and was quite turnover prone. He never had the same understanding of how to run an offense as Nash, Stockton, Paul or Kidd (on the same level of Payton, though). His 2 championships and his legacy have greatly overblown the player he actually was.

 

All I was trying to say originally was that there are at least 4 PG's who were on Thomas' level or better than him.

[DunkinDerozan]

Lowry should honestly been in the top 5.

 

17.3 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 8.7 apg, and 2.2 steals per game

 

Shooting 42% from 3 point and 90% from the line.

 

Those are elite numbers.

 

I think it would have to be like a top 7 or 8 for Lowry to be involved. He's really breaking out this year but those 5 guys on the list all deserve a spot over him, and Westbrook could arguably be on the list.