Is Pat Beverly our PG of the future?

Quit being obtuse. You wrote a statement. I disagreed with part of the statement, and I bolded the part with which I disagreed. You interpreted that as me disagreeing with your entire statement. And now you're asking how else you could've interpreted my disagreement?

I think most people would disagree with you. Most fans would know that

1) A single point guard's individual accomplishments don't equate to a pattern of success for star point guards in general.
2) Tony Parker has played alongside Tim Duncan for his entire career.
3) Tony Parker has played under Greg Popovich for his entire career.

and then fans would look at the total number of championship teams led by John Stockton, Jason Kidd, Allen Iverson, Gary Payton, Steve Nash, Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Russell Westbrook, Derrick Rose, and Rajon Rondo and realize that Tony Parker and his situation with the Spurs is an outlier.

 

Strawman argument detected.

My statement was "Championship teams tend to have either star point guards or defensive point guards." My statement was not "Championship teams tend to have star point guards." I would disagree with that statement, but I did not make it. For the portion of my statement to be wrong that you highlighted, no championship team could have a star PG and the overall statement had to be wrong.

Since you only disagree with the highlighted portion, it is implied you agree with the statement as a whole except the inclusion of star PG. Was there a championship team that had a star PG? We have established Parker at least twice that we agree on. That is all I need for that portion of the statement that you highlighted to be accurate provided the statement as a whole is accurate even if we disagree on a few instances of who is a star.

The presence of Duncan on the Spurs does not exclude Parker in any way. I did not say "Star PGs lead teams to Championships" because the best players (e.g. Duncan, LeBron, Shaq) in the league tend to have a huge influence on NBA Championships. I did not imply that star PGs have a pattern of success. Listing a bunch of star PGs that have not won championships means very little in showing who plays PG on Championship Teams. I do not disagree that Duncan and Pop are a huge reason for the Spurs success.

What I did imply was that a traditional PG that isn't a star PG nor a defensive PG will probably not start on a championship team. In context of a Beverley thread, my statement means it is okay that he isn't a star or a traditional PG because he is a defensive PG.

You are arguing against a statement I did not make.

 

It's pretty clear that you know your "star pg" argument is stupid, and you're now trying to hide behind semantics.

 

I can't help that semantics agree with me when I worded my statement the way I did because that is what I meant. I really thought there was another star PG besides Parker and Billups. I made the statement the way I did because I do not see star PGs as an impediment to a championship if other players are well enough.

I have made a similar statement a few times in relation to Beverley and Lin. Traditional PGs( e.g. Lin) have less value with star players on good teams than on bad teams without star players. Basically, most star players need the ball to show their full value. If you are trying to build a championship team, do not invest heavily in a traditional PG unless he is a star or projected to be one.

I worry about Beverley's injuries, but think he is more than fine at PG if other players are well enough.

 

As much as I like Pat, he's the PG of the present. The future? No.

 

What about Derrick Fisher or the PG who played for Dallas when they won in 2006? (I think it was Calderon(sp).) what about those pgs?

 

Is Pat Beverly our PG of the future?

Not likely. Since Rox want to win a Championship right now, it needs a PG with play making ability which Beverly is lacking.

The natural position of Harden is SG. Since he likes to play ISO and couldn't play decent D, why burden him with extra PG responsibility.

 

I dont mind pbev as pg of the future. He is probably my favorite player to watch due to his passion and his fearlessness when battling star opponents. He is not afraid and brings a street mentality/working mentality to the Rockets, which i think is valuable. He doesn't seem spoiled yet.

 

I count Fish as a defensive PG (not a good good one) as a defensive PG because his primary role as a PG is to guard other PG instead of creating like a traditional PG.

Dallas is an exception. Kidd was probably past his point of being called a star and while he was still very good defensively, he was there to create. My statement was not absolute.

Back on topic, I have no problem replacing Beverley with a star PG if the Rockets can get one at a reasonable price. I am not for trying to get a traditional PG that is not a star, that will not be a star, or be very close to being a star.

Caveat: For clarity, I am not against traditional PGs in a general sense, but I think they tend to be over-valued in the NBA. In other words, it is difficult to afford the stars needed to win a championship and afford a good traditional PG unless the traditional PG is one of the team's stars.

 

I posted parts of this in a different thread but it works better here. Beverley’s OffRtg of 110.9 (via nba.com) is the highest of the five Rocket starters. His DefRtg of 101.8 via nba.com is also the best (lowest) of any Rocket starter. His NetRtg of +9.1 ppg (via nba,com) is also the highest of any Rocket starter. In fact, that +9.1 NetRtg ranks 3rd among starting PGs in the entire league; only CP3 and Steph Curry do it better. The Rockets are better by +9.1 ppg with Beverley on the floor, normalized to 100 possessions. His Simple/Raw Plus/Minus (+/-) of +5.3 ppg tells us that the team averages +5.3 ppg when Beverley is on the floor. That +5.3 ppg is second best on the team; only Harden's +5.6 ppg is better. Beverley's ORPM of +2.97 ranks 12th among the 83 PGs in the league (that's very good); see espn.go.com); his ORPM of +2.97 is also second best on this team; only Harden's +5.97 is better; his DRPM of +1.29 ranks 6th among the 83 PGs in the league; that's elite among PGs (espn.go.com), and is also second best among the Rocket starters, only Dwight's +4.91 is better. Beverley's Total RPM of +4.26 is 5th best among the 83 PGs in the league (espn.go.com), and, higher than any other Rocket, including Harden (+3.13) and Dwight (+4.25). See http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/rp...RPM/position/1. If we could build the perfect Rocket Point Guard Prototype, Beverley would be it. Beverley's Wins Above Replacement (WAR) of +7.26 ranks 9th among the 83 PGs in the league (espn.go.com). Beverley’s xRAPM (Off) of +3.28 via http://stats-for-the-nba.appspot.com/teams/HOU.html is 2nd best on the team, with only Harden's +6.3 better. Beverley's xRAPM (Def) is also 2nd best on the team; second to Dwight's +4.69. Beverley's overall xRAPM of +3.36 trails only James Harden's +3.48. Beverley’s job is to protect Harden, and he did that very well last season. Synergy Sports ranked Beverley the #190th Best Defender in the league last year. That’s not very good but this certainly is: Synergy also ranked him the #18th Best On Ball Defender (Isolation) in the entire league; allowing just 0.58 points per possession. That’s elite! If Harden (and TJones) are starting next season, and, if, as expected, they continue to struggle defensively, Beverley will start. There’s no way McHale will start Harden and TJones, two of the worst defenders in the league, and bench Beverley, one of the best defenders in the league.

The general consensus seems to be that we should replace Beverley because he lacks playmaking. Ok, but before he is replaced with a respected and decorated proven playmaker, ask yourself this. Wouldn't the proven playmaker need to be an elite defender ala Patrick Beverley in order for the playmaking to result in a net positive? I remind you, the number of PGs in this league with better defensive numbers than Patrick Beverley can be counted on one hand. So which of these four point guards (not named Chris Paul or Ricky Rubio) is both an elite defender AND an elite playmaker? Eric Bledsoe? Great upside but unproven and not an elite playmaker; he’s also expensive, and you've got to deal with Rich Paul. No thanks. Jrue Holiday? I'm a Pelican fan...No way..he can barely handle his current job. Beverley is an elite on ball defender and an offensive catalyst (see his PACE and OffRtg via nba.com, his ORPM via espn.go.com, and his xRAPM (Off). And he does this without the ball. Beverley had the 2nd lowest USG% rate in the league last season (14.9% via nba.com). Only George Hill’s 14.8% was lower. Beverley also had the fewest number of touches per game last season than any starting point guard in the league (59.1/game); see nba.com player tracking. Harden and Howard need the ball to be effective and Beverley allows them that. For this Rocket team, Beverley is the perfect fit and he makes it go.

Sure, he can be replaced but he won’t like it; and, if recent history is an indicator, one-year Rocket starters do not respond well to re-benching, and, will not play their best from the bench, especially players who have suffered mightily to become a starter. Replacing Beverley could actually cause more harm than any added playmaking his replacement might bring. Left to me, I would keep him in the starting lineup. He's earned it. But Morey is persistent, so he will assemble his super team on day soon, but man oh man, what price glory?

 

Yes indeed.

 

RPM is a fit stat, while we had Harden as playmaker and a lemon on defense, and Parsons a secondary playmaker and a lemon on defense, someone who was neither a playmaker nor a lemon on defense fit them perfectly. With Ariza, the balance shifts to needing a little more playmaking and defense being less "completely screwed without".

 

in this system, Pat "Double D" Beverly is ideal!

 

Bev played far less 4th quarter mins, he is basically useless in clutch time, and Rockets is one of the worst 4th quarter contend team last season. It will be worse this season without 2nd playmaker to close the game.

 

Parsons was useless as a closer, the problem was, that no matter how good Harden was, we had very sporadic performances from Lin, defense from Dwight and nothing from the others.

 

Very well said. I wonder if Beverley's xRAPM score is inflated because the Rockets have performed better with him than with Lin, who had a pretty good xRAPM before joining the Rockets. I am comfortable with Harden's playmaking ability. This past season when Harden was on the bench, Beverley's defense was still more valuable than Lin's playmaking.

Rockets do need to have a healthy Beverley, though.

Granted, I would probably take Bledsoe or a star PG that is a playmaker with less defense than Beverley. That list isn't very long and I can't think of anyone readily available among it.

 

Your stats is off according to

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/beverpa01.html

I am not sure which site is more creditable, but PBev's DRtg this season was 108, which is contrary to 101.8 (what you stated). That in effect will mess up your calculation for NetRtg, which means that the basis of your analysis is off.

Could you elaborate on it?