PDA

View Full Version : im sick of "number one option on a contender"



thekmp211
06-24-2010, 09:18 AM
Okay, so i read these forums all the time of course and one of the great themes of NBA discussion is whether or not certain players can be "number one options on contending teams".

Some players, the kobes lebrons and wades of the world, are deemed fit to chuck up 25 shots a night on a contender because they have had team success with it. the second tier of free agents, however, apparently aren't fit for such a role because their previous team(s) havent had success with them there.

it drives me nuts. this is a TEAM game. you have to have a good TEAM to succeed. Kobe became a "legitimate" number one option once he got pau gasol, a certified 1a or 2. lebron has not won anything let has been deemed capable of carrying the load.

dwade is a good example because he fits both of my molds. he carried the team as the primary scorer in 2006 with shaq and veterans. since then he has gotten "better" but has not seen the same success. does that mean he is no longer a "legit number one option"?

chris bosh has had horrible teammates his entire career. yet because he hasnt been able to vault them to greatness he is now considered by some to be a sidekick.

the celtics success in 2008 was because 3 guys who had been told their whole career that they had to be the "legit number one option" finally decided it was all ******** and just went for winning instead.

some of these guys may end up winning rings as number ones, or number twos. it has less to do with their rank in the pecking order and more to do with what's going on around them.

personally i think that, on the right team, all of the heralded free agents could be number one guys. that doesnt mean their career well get them to the right team, but conversely the outcome of their career doesnt mean they dont have the skills neccessary.

thoughts?

Hellcrooner
06-24-2010, 09:22 AM
Okay, so i read these forums all the time of course and one of the great themes of NBA discussion is whether or not certain players can be "number one options on contending teams".

Some players, the kobes lebrons and wades of the world, are deemed fit to chuck up 25 shots a night on a contender because they have had team success with it. the second tier of free agents, however, apparently aren't fit for such a role because their previous team(s) havent had success with them there.

it drives me nuts. this is a TEAM game. you have to have a good TEAM to succeed. Kobe became a "legitimate" number one option once he got pau gasol, a certified 1a or 2. lebron has not won anything let has been deemed capable of carrying the load.

dwade is a good example because he fits both of my molds. he carried the team as the primary scorer in 2006 with shaq and veterans. since then he has gotten "better" but has not seen the same success. does that mean he is no longer a "legit number one option"?

chris bosh has had horrible teammates his entire career. yet because he hasnt been able to vault them to greatness he is now considered by some to be a sidekick.

the celtics success in 2008 was because 3 guys who had been told their whole career that they had to be the "legit number one option" finally decided it was all ******** and just went for winning instead.

some of these guys may end up winning rings as number ones, or number twos. it has less to do with their rank in the pecking order and more to do with what's going on around them.

personally i think that, on the right team, all of the heralded free agents could be number one guys. that doesnt mean their career well get them to the right team, but conversely the outcome of their career doesnt mean they dont have the skills neccessary.

thoughts?

:clap:

FOBolous
06-24-2010, 09:29 AM
i agree.

NYKalltheway
06-24-2010, 09:29 AM
Agreed, but the NBA has turned to who has the best superstars, so you can't take that factor away.

Hellcrooner
06-24-2010, 09:30 AM
asa matter of fact you put some of this F"failed franchise player" like Webber, Gasol, Bosh, Stoudamire in 04 pistons and they suddenly "lead" a team to a ring.

Chacarron
06-24-2010, 09:36 AM
Agree 100%. Excellent point.

maddBat
06-24-2010, 09:38 AM
agree. its a team game. but its not only the media that makes it look as if theres only 1 "superstar". its the players themselves as well. look at bosh. he tells every1 hes the centerpiece not the follower. no matter what it will always b that way. there will always be greed to be the best.

FOBolous
06-24-2010, 10:31 AM
and players who tries to do it all themselves usually fail (i.e. Tracy McGrady and Allen Iverson).

Sly Guy
06-24-2010, 10:33 AM
Agreed, but the NBA has turned to who has the best superstars, so you can't take that factor away.

yes you can. you can stop the refs from calling unwarranted star calls.

97NYer
06-24-2010, 10:52 AM
I'm only a kid (13) and just recently I've seen my team succeed. I agree with your point because I've realized that when I don't focus on taking over by myself, and put all that energy onto defense, my team plays better. It's how the Bucks with a core of Bogut/Jennings/Salmons performs better than the Raptors who have an arguably better core of Bosh/Turkoglu/Bargnani/Calderon/DeRozan, made the playoffs and gave the Hawks a run for their money. However, LeBron is a different player than Kobe. I'm not qualified to make a comparison, but I hate watching Kobe and love watching LeBron. Kobe's shot selection at times is horrendous. LeBron tends to try to get his teammates involved more often.

Illinirob83
06-24-2010, 11:17 AM
You aren't wrong........but Wade is still considered a legit #1 on a champion. And as you said, his team just isn't very good. But that doesn't change the fact that he could still be the BEST PLAYER ON A CHAMPION. That is all anyone is saying. It isn't BS. Look at your past champions since the ABA and NBA merged.

In this SUPERSTAR league you usually have to have a Hall of Fame player as your best player, it would help to have two. Or, in the Celtics '08 case they had three and good role players. Pierce was still good enough to be the best player on a champion in '08...wee just didn't know it until that playoff run. Kobe was still good enough in ''06-07 to be the best player on a champion, his team just wasn't very good (see Dwade currently). So you're not wrong, but no one should be saying a guy like Wade isn't good enough now to be the best player on champion because his current team around him. Anyone who says that is a fool.

Slimsim
06-24-2010, 11:23 AM
How dare you make sense on PSD.

ldc62
06-24-2010, 11:29 AM
I agree but its because the media and the nba loves putting the spotlight of team success on 1 player. Its always "Kobe and the Lakers" not "Lakers and Kobe".

Da Knicks
06-24-2010, 11:46 AM
bravo!:worthy::win: someone finally posts something good! All the real basketball fans know this but the nba cant take this route because it will not produce enough ratings. The nba needs superstars to sell jerseys and whatever else they want to sell.

Da Knicks
06-24-2010, 11:54 AM
To 97nyer congrats on understanding the game and not jumping into the hype that most kids fall into. I dont like watching Kobe play either because of the erratic shot attempts but if you watch the lakers keep an eye on Gasol he is a team player and you could learn a lot from him. As far as Lebron the guy is a team player who is a passer but cleveland does not have the necassary shooters or scheme for him, so watch him from the 1st to 3rd quarters and you will learn how to be a good teamate. I wish the nba wouldnt make guys who dont play team b-basketball the focus since kids are watching and some dont understand team basketball because of it.

thekmp211
06-24-2010, 12:30 PM
You aren't wrong........but Wade is still considered a legit #1 on a champion. And as you said, his team just isn't very good. But that doesn't change the fact that he could still be the BEST PLAYER ON A CHAMPION. That is all anyone is saying. It isn't BS. Look at your past champions since the ABA and NBA merged.

In this SUPERSTAR league you usually have to have a Hall of Fame player as your best player, it would help to have two. Or, in the Celtics '08 case they had three and good role players. Pierce was still good enough to be the best player on a champion in '08...wee just didn't know it until that playoff run. Kobe was still good enough in ''06-07 to be the best player on a champion, his team just wasn't very good (see Dwade currently). So you're not wrong, but no one should be saying a guy like Wade isn't good enough now to be the best player on champion because his current team around him. Anyone who says that is a fool.

exactly. and one could argue kg was the best player on that team, which is also my point. so many guys come and go without getting/seizing the opportunity in the league and it just seems silly to put players into these roles. who thought chauncey billups would be the best player on a championship team until it happened? probably just momma billups.

97NYer
06-24-2010, 12:40 PM
Thanks @Da Knicks, I really appreciate it. Being primarily a PG I love watching Deron and Nash. I do wish Nash was a better defender though...I pride myself on defense.

Tony_Starks
06-24-2010, 01:39 PM
Props for an objective, straight up basketball thread!

I agree. To me its not about 1st option or 2nd option but who is the leader? I don't care how good you're star player is he might not be a leader. The '04 Pistons for example played as a unit but Chauncey was the leader, and he wasn't even a allstar at that point. When Boston won the big 3 took turns taking over but KG was pretty much the defensive leader that set the tone. Now if you're leader happens to be you're best player thats great but its not always so. And it can be a leader offensively or defensively.

But the whole 1st option thing is subjective to the team. Like look at Shaq and Kobe respectively. They're the only two players I've seen that have won rings both as 1st and 2nd options. The situations called for it. When Shaq was here he was dominant so Kobe took a back seat. But when he went to Miami Wade was the man so Shaq was the sidekick. Likewise Kobe is now the best player so naturally he's the man with Gasol as the compliment.

The players have to figure it out but it takes unselfish players to do so.

Chronz
06-24-2010, 03:20 PM
Its why Ive always said, any bum could be a #1 option on a championship team if his supporting cast is good enough. Its a MEANINGLESS EXPRESSION.


and players who tries to do it all themselves usually fail (i.e. Tracy McGrady and Allen Iverson).
Great analysis, you should work for the Rockets. May as well put Yao on there, he has some of the highest usage #'s for a center in NBA history. The reality is the both Mac and Yao had to do it on their own, and thats why they failed. If Tmac and Yao didnt try to carry the load they would have failed harder.

FOBolous
06-24-2010, 03:51 PM
Its why Ive always said, any bum could be a #1 option on a championship team if his supporting cast is good enough. Its a MEANINGLESS EXPRESSION.


Great analysis, you should work for the Rockets. May as well put Yao on there, he has some of the highest usage #'s for a center in NBA history. The reality is the both Mac and Yao had to do it on their own, and thats why they failed. If Tmac and Yao didnt try to carry the load they would have failed harder.

can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not

but yeeea...not really. The Rockets play pretty well when Yao leads the team. He does a pretty good job of getting everyone involved. When Tmac leads, all the other players just stand there and watches him because he tries to do it all himself. When Yao leads, all the players are cutting, moving around, and passing the ball to each other hence the Rockets playing better. Basketball is a TEAM sport...no player can do it all by himself.

thekmp211
06-24-2010, 06:26 PM
i just hope this generation of stars gets it sooner rather than later. we could be treated to some great basketball.

magichatnumber9
06-24-2010, 06:44 PM
Good REad. I agree

Murphy_Dee
06-24-2010, 07:05 PM
Very good post, 100% agree with you!

Chronz
06-24-2010, 07:05 PM
but yeeea...not really. The Rockets play pretty well when Yao leads the team. He does a pretty good job of getting everyone involved. When Tmac leads, all the other players just stand there and watches him because he tries to do it all himself. When Yao leads, all the players are cutting, moving around, and passing the ball to each other hence the Rockets playing better. Basketball is a TEAM sport...no player can do it all by himself.
Define pretty well, they did pretty well when Tmac was leading them. In fact throughout their Rocket careers, when Tmac was in top form and in the lineup but Yao wasnt, the team did better than vice versa so what exactly are you saying? But your wrong in your analysis, every time you speak about Tmac's career its as if you think he was only a Rocket and he only played 1 particular style. Broaden your view of the NBA and its players. Tmac has played in many offenses and has proven to substantially elevate his teammates level of play with his playing style. Sadly theres only so much one can do with the talent of his support.

Tmac did whatever the situation called for, it depends on the years and what exactly was asked of them. Same thing with Yao, Yao has had some of the highest usage #'s ever for a center when JVG was the coach. It was by design to try to get Yao the ball for as long as he was on the court. Do you fault Yao for doing what was asked? Both players always adapted to whoever was around them. Its not their fault the quality of their teammates differed.

Put it this way, if those 2 dont try to carry the load for the Rockets then they fail even harder. Of course its team sport, it doesnt change the fact that not everyone is treated equally.
Like do you think Adelman is a better coach than JVG because hes gotten Yao to do less? Or is that simply a result of the talent around him?

EYDI819
06-24-2010, 07:24 PM
I DO NOT AGREE AND THIS THREAD SUCKS! (i really do agree with all of you but somebody got to be a hater in EVERY thread lol) PS i hate you lol

EaglesJackson10
06-24-2010, 07:26 PM
Yeah I'm really tired of this **** too. Whenever someone talks about a player being drafted they say he is a "number 2 on a championship team" or "a number 1 on a championship team." No one was saying when Kobe Bryant was drafted whether or not he would be a number one on a championship team. I doubt any one was saying whether or not Wade could be either. I hate it because there is no way of knowing. No one thought Kobe would be the closest thing to the next Michael Jordan when he was drafted 13th. I hate these "what option would the be on a championship team" things. To all the experts and people on this site your predictions on what a player will be mean nothing because you have no idea how these players will turn out and most of the time there is no way of knowing what option they will be on a championship team because most won't play on a championship team.