Can we make a playoff run with Kemba at starting point?

I didnt feel that kemba was ready for the nba ,but he have changed my mind. i was certainly a kemba critic because of his sg mentality but kemba really have been productive this year and efficient .
yes russell and kemba are shoot first pg's ,but i feel kemba is more natural and lets the game come to him , while russell clearly wants to be the alpha dog and forces the game. kemba has good court vision and doesn't force turnovers, while russell court vision sucks and forces alot of to's .

our losing has nothing to do with kemba, it has more to do with that we only have like 6 quality/good nba players(kemba,hendo,sessions,mkg,gordon,and haywood) on our roster. im sorry but biz is still a prospect, mully doesnt know what position he is and taylor is a bench payer ,and these players are getting the bulk of the mins.

i truly feel kemba(of course he needs talent around him) can lead us to becoming title contenders because chauncey wasnt a pass first pg, tony parker's a scorer, mike bibby (sac days),and of course allen iverson lead their teams to elite status.for years i've been telling people that you dont need a team full of superstars to become champions .you can build a title team around your star player without pairing him with a superstar because i feel stars clash and their games cant adjust with others; examples knicks(amare&melo),nets(deron,jj) lakers(kobe,nash,and howard). the heat are an exception because lebron game can an adapt to any situation, and the thunder are an exception but i do feel that if they would of had a simple pg like andre miller or jason kidd they could of won because russell needs his own team(better off trading russell instead of harden).

We can win a championship with Kemba at point guard.

We need other players around him. I honestly feel sorry alot of the time for Kemba(this year and last year) because he's the only guy on the floor that seems to be able to score at will. Being a 'point guard' isn't all about leading the team is assists or being a great passer. I think he's doing a great job leading. He's made HUGE strides since last year and I think Kemba will be a 20+ ppg scorer in either a year or 2. He's already at about 18 now.

The more time Kemba gets to develop and learn how to be a 'true point guard' as people have spoke of in this thread, the better the team will get. Kemba didn't really develop in college until his last year at UCONN. Give him time. IDK how many times I have to say 'Give him time' on BobcatsPlanet. Everyone needs to stop overreacting about 1 bad game or whatever from a young player. That means Kemba, Byron, Bismack, Jeff, MKG, etc...they just need time. I think we have a great young team and we're just in a rough patch now.

In short, Kemba's a great player already...the best we've had at PG in franchise history...and Yes, we can make a long playoff run with him at PG.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ammofan

Everyone needs to stop overreacting about 1 bad game or whatever from a young player.

---

Isn't ironic as hell that this thread came after one of Kemba's best games?

There's more score first PGs that have won a championship than "pure" PGs. How many 'ships does Nash/Williams/Paul have again? On the flip guys like Tony Parker & Chauncey Billups have some nice hardware.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spectre

Isn't ironic as hell that this thread came after one of Kemba's best games?

There's more score first PGs that have won a championship than "pure" PGs. How many 'ships does Nash/Williams/Paul have again? On the flip guys like Tony Parker & Chauncey Billups have some nice hardware.

---

Well, that's a bit disingenuous, as all of Parkers' rings are directly attributable to Tim Duncan, and the '04 Pistons were a one-off anomaly with no real "best player". If you want to extend the timeline out to include Magic and Isaiah, then the count flips. All it really means is that you can win with either type of point guard, and it mostly comes down to marquee guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogg

Well, that's a bit disingenuous, as all of Parkers' rings are directly attributable to Tim Duncan, and the '04 Pistons were a one-off anomaly with no real "best player". If you want to extend the timeline out to include Magic and Isaiah, then the count flips. All it really means is that you can win with either type of point guard, and it mostly comes down to marquee guys.

---

FWIW, Isiah Thomas was not a pass-first PG & Magic never won a championship without Kareem if you want to say that Parker's rings are directly attributable to Duncan. As far as the anomaly that was the '04 Pistons, Billups was their best player & it showed when he won Finals MVP, not to mention the demise of them as contenders once he was traded away

Just for the record I'd like to say that yes, yes I think we can.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fan_of_a_fan

FWIW, Isiah Thomas was not a pass-first PG & Magic never won a championship without Kareem if you want to say that Parker's rings are directly attributable to Duncan

---

Isaiah could easily create for others or score on his own, depending on what the situation called for. I'm not going to discount excellent passing just because he could also score thirty whenever he needed to.
Magic was easily the best player on the Lakers in 87 and 88, and was 1b at worst before then to another top-five all-time guy. HUGE difference between Magic and Tony Parker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogg

Isaiah could easily create for others or score on his own, depending on what the situation called for. I'm not going to discount excellent passing just because he could also score thirty whenever he needed to.
Magic was easily the best player on the Lakers in 87 and 88, and was 1b at worst before then to another top-five all-time guy. HUGE difference between Magic and Tony Parker.

---

Isiah attempted the most shots per game for those Bad Boy Pistons championship teams.

Tony Parker won Finals MVP for the latest Spurs championship. Therefore, you can say Parker was 1b at worst for 2 of the 3 they won together

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gm in training

how did i get thrown in here lol?

---

Was just messin... kind of :really2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cort

I will stand by analysis of him from a pure, tangible, basketball standpoint. ISO PG DOES NOT WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS, SCORE FIRS PGs DO NOT WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS; THEY MAY PRODUCES PLAYOFF APPEARENCES, BUT THE CEILING IS SET BELOW A CHAMPIONSHIP VICTORY. OKC lost *BC Westbrook is ISO...did you see how many shots he took away from Harden and Durant; his style of game-play *was the difference in them losing to the Heat. The Bulls will not win a championship bc Rose is ISO, don't get fooled by his MVP award and deep playoff run; even LeBron James who often runs the point is a distribut first player, he will dish it out more often than he will take the shot.

ISO PGs are like run first QBs in the NFL, they will get you wins...but they never have, and never will win championships. If Westbrook wins a championship, it will be *in spite of his playing style, not because of his playing style. No argument will convince me you can get a ring with a score first PG. I will gladly read any examples of a PG winning a championship that you can throw out there.

---

If this is what you want to debate, fine. This is something legitimate to talk about. But don't make up things about a player to try to validate your point, especially if its disparaging or denigrating. People on this board are too sharp to let things like that slide.

As for winning championships, you almost need two Hall of Famers to win a title, pure point guard or not. Paul, Nash, Stockton, Price, Mark Jackson, Payton (though he eventually chased one down), Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson, Terry Porter, Maurice Cheeks - all were great passers and playmakers who could never win in their prime.

I'd say you need an elite wing and/or post up player to win it all, regardless of the type of point guard you have. Then a bunch of good fortune and a Hall of Fame worthy performance by your star in the playoffs, and there's a shot to win a title.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bogg

Well, that's a bit disingenuous, as all of Parkers' rings are directly attributable to Tim Duncan, and the '04 Pistons were a one-off anomaly with no real "best player". If you want to extend the timeline out to include Magic and Isaiah, then the count flips. All it really means is that you can win with either type of point guard, and it mostly comes down to marquee guys.

---

I think a lot of us agree that we still need a star...so if Kemba gets one I suspect it will also be directly attributable to another player. No one in here insinuated that Kemba could do it all himself.