PDA

View Full Version : What is the Least important position in the NBA?



ProdigyI
05-19-2009, 07:10 PM
I would have to say the SF position. Many guards can play that position and its not common when you have somebody that is a prototypical SF. Bottom line is teams can survive and win without a decent SF.

Vinny642
05-19-2009, 07:17 PM
I agree with SF.

GSW fan
05-19-2009, 07:26 PM
SF's can play huge roles in games.

This question doesnt have an answer.
It depends..

madiaz3
05-19-2009, 07:28 PM
Look back at the past 5-6 championship teams and see how many of them had SFs that played pivotal roles.

what54!?
05-19-2009, 07:29 PM
idk it depends on the team. I guess its SF....depending on the team

Master Mind
05-19-2009, 07:29 PM
Power Foward

Denver-boy
05-19-2009, 07:33 PM
oh... it's SF.... my bad i read it wrong

brenmania
05-19-2009, 07:36 PM
Pg

superkegger
05-19-2009, 07:41 PM
it depends on the team. SF is clearly most important to the cavs. C is most important to the Magic. They're all important.

Joshtd1
05-19-2009, 07:45 PM
Personall I think its Center

KB24PG16
05-19-2009, 07:46 PM
equal for those who picked sf: what if your team is playing lebron then how important is it to have sf that can play defense

LayZbone
05-19-2009, 07:47 PM
It depends. I think you can afford to have a crappy SG if your SF is great, and vice-versa. Dhantay Jones, Antoine Wright, Michael Finley, James Jones, Nicolas Batum, Ariza, Reddick, Willie Green....a lot of these guys shouldn't be starting but they all have great perimeter players playing alongside them, and their teams are doing (were doing) good.

what54!?
05-19-2009, 07:48 PM
ok I change mine. In todays NBA its center

IndyRealist
05-19-2009, 08:24 PM
Shooting Guard. They have the least responsibilities. They don't have to handle the ball like PG's, they don't have to defend like SF's, they don't have to slash into the paint, they don't have to defend the paint, they don't have to rebound, they aren't generally the help defense. The prototypical SG is mostly a jump shooter on offense, and on defense just defends another jump shooter.

Obviously I'm not talking about the Kobes and Wades of the league, their teams are constructed around them. I'm talking about the Jamal Crawfords, the Ben Gordons, the Anthony Parkers of the league who talk a high volume of spot up jumpers and don't do much else.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:25 PM
Power Foward

Tell that to the Celtics.

ink
05-19-2009, 08:27 PM
Tell that to the Celtics.

+1

... and Mavericks.

superkegger
05-19-2009, 08:29 PM
+1

... and Mavericks.

and the spurs, lakers, raptors, blazers.

You could do that for any position on a number of teams.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:32 PM
sorry guys, as much as we love them and think it's their league, the answer is point guard... as much as we love to hear about the all-star point guards, Nash has zero rings, Kidd has zero rings, Paul has zero rings (so far), Williams has zero rings (so far), Harris has zero rings, Arenas has zero rings, Baron Davis has zero rings, Iverson has zero rings, Bibby has zero rings, Andre Miller has zero rings, Mo Williams might have a ring but it certainly won't be because of him....etc.
Meanwhile Rondo is a champion because of the rest of his team, Fisher is a champion because of the rest of his team, Parker is a key cog but is arguably the third option on his team, Jason Williams and Gary Payton are champions because of Shaq and Wade, anyone who played point with Michael Jordan is a champion because he played with Michael Jordan.... et cetera.

Because of the nature of the game, point guards simply do not dominate.

The only guy who has proven even a mild exception to this rule is Chauncey Billups (and Parker to an extent.)

sanfranfan1210
05-19-2009, 08:33 PM
I think they are all equal

ink
05-19-2009, 08:34 PM
and the spurs, lakers, raptors, blazers.

You could do that for any position on a number of teams.

They're all important. You build the team around the best talent you have. The Hornets build from PG out. The Cavs, from SF out. The Lakers, from SG out. The Magic, from C out. The Raptors, from PF out. There is no formula. Every position matters.

Hellcrooner
05-19-2009, 08:36 PM
yeah of course sf dont matter......;)

Pippen, Bird, Havliceck, Dr J, Baylor, Rick Barry....yeah they dont matter.

IndyRealist
05-19-2009, 08:37 PM
sorry guys, as much as we love them and think it's their league, the answer is point guard... as much as we love to hear about the all-star point guards, Nash has zero rings, Kidd has zero rings, Paul has zero rings (so far), Williams has zero rings (so far), Harris has zero rings, Arenas has zero rings, Baron Davis has zero rings, Iverson has zero rings, Bibby has zero rings, Andre Miller has zero rings, Mo Williams might have a ring but it certainly won't be because of him....etc.
Meanwhile Rondo is a champion because of the rest of his team, Fisher is a champion because of the rest of his team, Parker is a key cog but is arguably the third option on his team, Jason Williams and Gary Payton are champions because of Shaq and Wade, anyone who played point with Michael Jordan is a champion because he played with Michael Jordan.... et cetera.

Because of the nature of the game, point guards simply do not dominate.

The only guy who has proven even a mild exception to this rule is Chauncey Billups (and Parker to an extent.)

But without those all star PG's, where would their teams be? Would Lebron be steamrolling the competition without Mo? Does Dwight have a chance at the Finals without Jameer Nelson? Would the Celtics even have been in the playoffs this year withou Rondo? You say they're carried by their team, I say they don't get enough credit.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:37 PM
+1

....did you edit my post to capitalize the word celtics?

ink
05-19-2009, 08:39 PM
....did you edit my post to capitalize the word celtics?

:confused:

It would say so if someone edited your post. All I did was agree with you. lol.

Hellcrooner
05-19-2009, 08:39 PM
Cousy has no rings? O Robertson has no rings? Isiaih thomas has no rings? Magic Johnson has no rings? Billups? TOny Parker?


Oh and by the way its difficult to find a Nba champion withouth an at least Borderline All star Pg.

JordansBulls
05-19-2009, 08:39 PM
Based on history.

http://s120.photobucket.com/albums/o165/JordansBulls/nbachampionshipstatspf4.jpg

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:43 PM
But without those all star PG's, where would their teams be? Would Lebron be steamrolling the competition without Mo? Does Dwight have a chance at the Finals without Jameer Nelson? Would the Celtics even have been in the playoffs this year withou Rondo? You say they're carried by their team, I say they don't get enough credit.

Considering that LeBron has pretty much dismantled every team by himself, I'm gonna say.... yes.
getting a second option at ANY position is all LeBron needed. a wing shooter was perfect, because it spreads the offense more for the lane-crashing LeBron.

Considering that Jameer Nelson hasn't played one minute of playoff basketball with the Magic, and that Rajon Rondo played 577, and the Magic still won, I'm gonna say.... yes.

Considering that the Celtics were a third seed missing Garnett, and no one with a brain would take Rondo over Garnett, I'm gonna say.... yes.
(Of course Garnett complicates that, but that just shows how much more important big men like Garnett are in the first place.)

Point guards get credit from me, they just get way more credit from other people. as much as we wish it to be true, they so rarely lead teams as a first option to the promised land.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:44 PM
:confused:

It would say so if someone edited your post. All I did was agree with you. lol.

lol i was confused. you had two posts earlier (i guess you deleted the first one) and one of them was lowercase celtics and the other was uppercase.

*shrug*

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:46 PM
Cousy has no rings? O Robertson has no rings? Isiaih thomas has no rings? Magic Johnson has no rings? Billups? TOny Parker?


Oh and by the way its difficult to find a Nba champion withouth an at least Borderline All star Pg.

Um, yeah, Derek Fisher, Jason Williams, (enter Chicago PG with Jordan here), and a 9 point-7 assist Avery Johnson were all real all-stars. lol.

Rajon Rondo is getting there this year, but last year? He could have been playing on one foot and that team would have won.

Magic was a 6'8" hybrid. He is quite literally a massive exception.

ink
05-19-2009, 08:47 PM
lol i was confused. you had two posts earlier (i guess you deleted the first one) and one of them was lowercase celtics and the other was uppercase.

*shrug*

My computer glitched and I came up with two posts, so I deleted the duplicate.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:49 PM
Based on history.

http://s120.photobucket.com/albums/o165/JordansBulls/nbachampionshipstatspf4.jpg

I assume that's finals MVP's?

JordansBulls
05-19-2009, 08:54 PM
I assume that's finals MVP's?

Nope, guys who won the title that year and was considered the best for the year.

theuuord
05-19-2009, 08:59 PM
Nope, guys who won the title that year and was considered the best for the year.

by who?

Where's KG?
05-19-2009, 09:15 PM
The least important position in the NBA is......The number 1 position in the draft lottery.......lol...no, im not a Kings fan......However that NBA draft lottery is funny

prash
05-19-2009, 10:34 PM
Lotta teams have won Championships without great PG's

jrodmesche
05-19-2009, 10:38 PM
power forward

JJ81
05-20-2009, 12:07 AM
These questions are stupid.

ProdigyI
05-20-2009, 01:53 AM
Considering that LeBron has pretty much dismantled every team by himself, I'm gonna say.... yes.
getting a second option at ANY position is all LeBron needed. a wing shooter was perfect, because it spreads the offense more for the lane-crashing LeBron.

Considering that Jameer Nelson hasn't played one minute of playoff basketball with the Magic, and that Rajon Rondo played 577, and the Magic still won, I'm gonna say.... yes.

Considering that the Celtics were a third seed missing Garnett, and no one with a brain would take Rondo over Garnett, I'm gonna say.... yes.
(Of course Garnett complicates that, but that just shows how much more important big men like Garnett are in the first place.)

Point guards get credit from me, they just get way more credit from other people. as much as we wish it to be true, they so rarely lead teams as a first option to the promised land.

It takes more of one less dominant position on a team helping another dominant position on a team to win in most/all cases.

Take Mo Williams for example. Lebron didn't have an above average PG in the years before and the first year he gets one, the Cavs finish with the best record in the NBA and are dominating in the playoffs.

Same goes with Pau Gasol. You put a way above average PF along with an elite SG, good things happen.

I dont think the same can be said with a typical SF and another postion IMO.

superkegger
05-20-2009, 02:39 PM
Nope, guys who won the title that year and was considered the best for the year.


by who?

My thoughts exactly...

celticsboy20534
05-20-2009, 02:49 PM
LeBrons a small forward and so is pierce enough said all posistions are equally as important

AIverson
05-20-2009, 02:56 PM
The wing positions, SG and SF.

I voted SF because a good SG can probably have more of an impact than a SF.

@people saying PF and C:

I don't know who you plan on having protect the rim and grab rebounds. That's the type of mentality that creates these soft teams that do well in the regular season only to get trashed and pushed around in the post season.

JordansBulls
05-20-2009, 03:05 PM
by who?

By who was considered the primary star on the team and who carried the team the most.

atl_braves_fan
05-20-2009, 03:17 PM
I think that SF and SG are largely interchangeable. Thus, I would have to say that if you have a good SF, SG is the least important position. If you have a good SG, SF is the least important position.

However, I voted that all are important because if I was building a team, I would just want the 5 best available players regardless of position.

atl_braves_fan
05-20-2009, 03:19 PM
These questions are stupid.

Then don't click on them.

ManRam
05-20-2009, 03:23 PM
It depends on the type of team, but I 100% disagree that it's the SF. SFs have to be the most versatile players on the team. Good SFs have to be solid both inside and outside. SGs I think are the least important. They aren't the primary ball handlers and you can get away with having just an average SG, or a SG that just shoots. You can get away with an average SG. Just look at all the teams in the playoffs. The Magic weakest spot is SG. The Cav's weakest spot is SG (although I love Delonte). The Nuggets weakest spot is SG. Hedo, LBJ and Carmelo are the SFs for those other teams, and arguably the most important players. Kobe plays more like a point forward than a SG. If you have a point forward, like Jordan was, like LeBron and Hedo are, you are going to be able to pose a ton of match up problems.

tkshy
05-20-2009, 03:23 PM
I think they are equally important depending on the team. Look at the Lakers, they would have loved to keep Shaq at C and win a few more rings. Then again look at the Bulls of the 90's, no pg, or c, and 1 dimensional pf. I think they did pretty good.

JIDsanity
05-20-2009, 03:27 PM
Every player on the court is important, I can't believe homw many people voted for any other answer

azkarraga
05-20-2009, 03:41 PM
to me, the most important is PG. but i've voted for PG. Because it seems to be the less important right now. Take a look at the finalist, every team has strong SG, SF, PF or C, but no strong PG. Lakers got Fisher, who's not top 5. Cavs got Mo W, not top 5. Magic got Alston, still no top 5. Only Denver's got a star PG.

philab
05-20-2009, 03:50 PM
It's Power Forward, has always been PF, and will always be PF.

If you give me the option of upgrading from average player to great player at any one position, PF is the last position I pick. That's my criteria.

The championship team data JordanBulls posted validates this. Hollinger's Value Added (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=hollinger_john&page=PERDiem-090325) statistic validates this.

In other words, it's the most replaceable position on the court.

fast_break
05-20-2009, 03:57 PM
idk, i think they're all important

no two teams is alike. different teams have differing importance/talent at different positions.... so its not an easy answer

....maybe make a list of total salary earned at each position... the position with the least $ is the least important :D