Poll: Is Eric Bledsoe a #1 player on a championship team

[JCSunsfan]

Thought I might see what people are thinking.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I turned to the only source I'd trust in a situation like this. I got a "reply hazy try again and an "ask again later" plus two "signs point to yes". I was going to go with the answers my Magic 8 Ball gave me and then I remembered we were talking about Bledsoe, best player and championship team. The answer is "not likely". I don't believe an undersized point guard is ever likely to be the best player on a championship team. I think he's capable of being one of the stars on a championship team, even a go-to player (a Tony Parker type) but if he's your number one guy I'm not sure you can win it all.

Steve

 

[Mainstreet]

...I don't believe an undersized point guard is ever likely to be the best player on a championship team. I think he's capable of being one of the stars on a championship team, even a go-to player (a Tony Parker type) but if he's your number one guy I'm not sure you can win it all.

Steve

Chris Paul and Tony Parker might be the best players on their respective teams.

 

[Chaplin]

Recent history says that if a team has a PG as their best player, they will not win a championship. Can Chris Paul buck that trend? Don't know, but if you look at the last 20 years, most of the teams that won the title did not have a PG as their best #1 player.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Chris Paul and Tony Parker might be the best players on their respective teams.

They probably are but I don't think either team is a decent bet to win it all. I'm not saying Bledsoe couldn't possibly be the best player on a championship team, I just think it's a long shot. How long has it been since a team won the championship whose best player was a point guard, let along an undersized one? Still, I'd be thrilled if Eric played himself to the level of a Chris Paul or a Tony Parker. Those two are each good enough to win it all but unless someone like Leonard or Griffin step up and enter the best player in the league argument I just don't think it's going to happen.

Steve

 

[Errntknght]

I think its possible because he has some room to grow and right now he's not that outstanding. His asst/TO ratio, for example, is only 1.7 - the bottom quartile among starting PGs. Among PGs who seem to be capable of being #1 on a championship team we find Chris Paul 3.6, Tony Parker 2.7, Ty Lawson 2.6, Kyrie Irving 2.6, Damien Lillard 3.0, Derrick Rose 2.1 (career), John Wall 2.7. Mike Conley 3.3. (I put Rose's career number because he is uncharacteristically low at .8 this year.) Nash, who seemed to commit a good number of turnovers with his aggressive passing, has a career average of 2.9.
Bledsoe has already improved from 1.4 his first two years to 1.7 last year and this. I expect it will increase this year as he and his teammates get more used to each other but I'd say he still needs to work hard at limiting his turnovers. If Hornacek and practice can improve his midrange shooting as well he'll be a good candidate for the #1 on the Suns Championship team in a few years!

 

[sunsfan88]

No he isn't the #1 option on a championship team unless his game develops a whole lot more.

I'm not completely convinced that he can be the #2 player on a championship but I wouldn't be surprised if he's capable of that role if he expands his game a little more.

 

[SirStefan32]

No, definitely not the number one player on a serious contender, but I am convinced he is a solid second option.

 

[JS22]

No. Not unless he can magically grow 6 more inches and play SF.

But, he can be one of the best #2's in the league.

 

[BC867]

No. Not unless he can magically grow 6 more inches and play SF.

But, he can be one of the best #2's in the league.

A "3". A "2". Why not as a Point Guard? He has shown signs that he can grow into it. And with his defense. You disrupt your opposing "1" on defense, you are disrupting the whole team.

He has been playing at a magical level in the 4th quarter. The question is can he develop into a superstar level in Quarters 1-3, while keeping the rest of his team involved?

I believe the only answer is . . . time will tell. It will be fun watching it develop.

I don't want to be sacrilegious, but Bledsoe is already better defensively and with the game on the line than MVSteve. Taking nothing away from Steve in his prime, but we're facing the future, not the past.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Not even close.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Not even close.

That seems a bit harsh. Are you answering his question believing he wants to know whether Bledsoe has reached that championship level or are you projecting based on what you've seen so far? I'd say the question is laughable if you view him through his time as a Clipper but it's not that much of a stretch if you judge him on his brief time in Phoenix.

Steve

 

[Phrazbit]

Too soon to say. If he keeps up his insane 26 PER while also playing all-NBA defense, then absolutely. He'd be one of the top 10 players in the entire league. But I gotta think he will cool off somewhat.

And I disagree with the idea that PGs cant be #1s on a title contender, its been proven wrong many times.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Too soon to say. If he keeps up his insane 26 PER while also playing all-NBA defense, then absolutely. He'd be one of the top 10 players in the entire league. But I gotta think he will cool off somewhat.

And I disagree with the idea that PGs cant be #1s on a title contender, its been proven wrong many times.

Nash was the best player on a title contender. Derrick Rose was the best player on a title contender. Parker is (and has been for a year or two) the best player on a title contender. Westbrook is arguably the best player on a title contender. Chris Paul is the best player on a team that keeps getting called a title contender. But, none of them have proven they can be the best player on a championship team and the OP specifically asked about "championship team".

I wouldn't rule it out but in general, teams built around a superstar point guard typically do not win championships. I'd like our chances a lot more if Eric continued to improve and we had another guy on the team that was arguably better. It's certainly not impossible that he could stay as he is and go on to lead a team to a title but I don't think he was asking if it was simply within the realm of the possible.

In the end I think the question should be can you build around Eric and become a serious contender? Right now, I'd have to say the answer is yes. Maybe when the league has more film on the Suns in general and Bledsoe specifically we'll see his flaws come to light but so far he's played like one of the better players in the league.

Steve

 

[Phrazbit]

Nash was the best player on a title contender. Derrick Rose was the best player on a title contender. Parker is (and has been for a year or two) the best player on a title contender. Westbrook is arguably the best player on a title contender. Chris Paul is the best player on a team that keeps getting called a title contender. But, none of them have proven they can be the best player on a championship team and the OP specifically asked about "championship team".

I wouldn't rule it out but in general, teams built around a superstar point guard typically do not win championships. I'd like our chances a lot more if Eric continued to improve and we had another guy on the team that was arguably better. It's certainly not impossible that he could stay as he is and go on to lead a team to a title but I don't think he was asking if it was simply within the realm of the possible.

In the end I think the question should be can you build around Eric and become a serious contender? Right now, I'd have to say the answer is yes. Maybe when the league has more film on the Suns in general and Bledsoe specifically we'll see his flaws come to light but so far he's played like one of the better players in the league.

Steve

Detroit won two titles and Isiah was unquestionably their #1 player. I dont think anyone doubts the Suns COULD have won a title while Nash was here had a few small breaks go their way. Its a legit question as to who the Spurs best player has been the last several years, and Parker did win finals MVP in 2007.

 

[elindholm]

He'd be one of the top 10 players in the entire league.

Which is nowhere near elite enough to be the best player on a championship team. You pretty much have to be top 2, maybe top 3, unless you have an ungodly supporting cast or a special relationship with the officials.

 

[Phrazbit]

Which is nowhere near elite enough to be the best player on a championship team. You pretty much have to be top 2, maybe top 3, unless you have an ungodly supporting cast or a special relationship with the officials.

Did Dirk have an ungodly supporting cast? I'd hardly say so.

Other than having, hands down, the BEST player in the league, I dont think there is a certain formula for building a title contender. I am not trying to say that Bledsoe is a bonafide star or is going to take us to a title but I strongly disagree with the idea that an all-nba point guard cant be best player on a title team.

And the Suns still have a ton of flexibility to add more talent, in the form of a superstar or a bunch of high caliber supporting players is hardly out of the question. We have cap space and a bounty of picks. IMO its waaaaay to soon to start sweating if we have the pieces to win a title.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Detroit won two titles and Isiah was unquestionably their #1 player. I dont think anyone doubts the Suns COULD have won a title while Nash was here had a few small breaks go their way. Its a legit question as to who the Spurs best player has been the last several years, and Parker did win finals MVP in 2007.

Parker has been their best player for a couple years now but if you're going to seriously make the case that he was the best player on that 2007 team I don't know what to tell you. I agree, we could have won the championship with Nash as our best player but this forum typically discounts Mike and his system so I figured if you can't use the excuses for Mike you can't use those exact same excuses to put Nash in that championship caliber group.

There's no denying that teams have won the championship with a PG as their star but you had to go back more than 2 decades to find an undebatable example. The game has changed a lot since then. I'll say it again - I think it can be done, I think it's less likely for a team to win it all with a true PG as their star versus other positions and I think you pretty much proved it with your responses.

Steve

 

[Phrazbit]

Parker has been their best player for a couple years now but if you're going to seriously make the case that he was the best player on that 2007 team I don't know what to tell you. I agree, we could have won the championship with Nash as our best player but this forum typically discounts Mike and his system so I figured if you can't use the excuses for Mike you can't use those exact same excuses to put Nash in that championship caliber group.

There's no denying that teams have won the championship with a PG as their star but you had to go back more than 2 decades to find an undebatable example. The game has changed a lot since then. I'll say it again - I think it can be done, I think it's less likely for a team to win it all with a true PG as their star versus other positions and I think you pretty much proved it with your responses.

Steve

I'm not claiming its easy, just not impossible like some seem to think. As for Parker, I would also say that Duncan was their best player in 2007, but Parker was their best player in the finals and won MVP. And I do think Parker was their best player last year and they were a made FT by Leonard or a defensive rebound from beating Miami in 6.

This concern about Bledsoe maybe being good, but NOT being good enough to be the best guy on a title winner just seems funny to me. A couple weeks ago some questioned if he was NBA starting material or just a high quality backup. Now him maybe being an all-star quality player is potentially a problem because point guards in recent years have not been #1 options on title winners.

Unless you have the absolute best player in the league, then there is a certain amount of luck required to win the title. And I also think there is no proven formula for how to win a title. I like the building blocks we have. We have a lot of picks, a lot of cap space and some young players who look strong (and thats despite what I perceive as a whiff on Len). The roster is still very fluid and I think the heavy rate of turnover will continue over the next year. IMO, only Bledsoe, Len and Plumlee (who woulda thunk) are strong bets to still be Suns in 2 years. So I will stress about our max potential once I see something resembling a finished product.

If Bledsoe ends up being awesome but not awesome enough to win the title then I guess thats something we will have to deal with after we get beat in the the conference finals.

 

[Chaplin]

Too soon to say. If he keeps up his insane 26 PER while also playing all-NBA defense, then absolutely. He'd be one of the top 10 players in the entire league. But I gotta think he will cool off somewhat.

And I disagree with the idea that PGs cant be #1s on a title contender, its been proven wrong many times.

He can be a #1 on a title CONTENDER, but can he be a #1 on a title WINNER? I don't think so. Nash is one of the best PGs in the history of league. How many titles did he win as the best player on his team?

Isaiah, sure, he might be an exception. But you said "many times". When else? Especially in today's NBA (Detroit of 1990 would hardly be included in that group).

 

[Gaddabout]

I look at it like this: If a game comes down to Eric Bledsoe matching up against Tony Parker, Chris Paul or Russell Westbrook, am I confident in that matchup?

I'm not even hopeful, really. Bledsoe's going to lost that one 3 out of 4 times at his current level of play (which is very good).

 

[JCSunsfan]

Parker has been their best player for a couple years now but if you're going to seriously make the case that he was the best player on that 2007 team I don't know what to tell you. I agree, we could have won the championship with Nash as our best player but this forum typically discounts Mike and his system so I figured if you can't use the excuses for Mike you can't use those exact same excuses to put Nash in that championship caliber group.

There's no denying that teams have won the championship with a PG as their star but you had to go back more than 2 decades to find an undebatable example. The game has changed a lot since then. I'll say it again - I think it can be done, I think it's less likely for a team to win it all with a true PG as their star versus other positions and I think you pretty much proved it with your responses.

Steve

Absent accompanying reasons the fact that it hasn't happened recently is no particular indication of anything more than coincidence.

I still haven't heard anyone tell me HOW the game is changed that now makes this unlikely. I would contend that the present hand checking restrictions make it more likely now than before.

 

[Chaplin]

I look at it like this: If a game comes down to Eric Bledsoe matching up against Tony Parker, Chris Paul or Russell Westbrook, am I confident in that matchup?

I'm not even hopeful, really. Bledsoe's going to lost that one 3 out of 4 times at his current level of play (which is very good).

Not saying much since Bledsoe has only been the main man for all of 7 games.

 

[sunsfan88]

Westbrook is arguably the best player on a title contender.

Kevin Durant died???!! Why has ESPN not reported this??

 

[sunsfan88]

And I disagree with the idea that PGs cant be #1s on a title contender, its been proven wrong many times.

There's a difference between being #1 on a title contender and being #1 on a championship winning team. In the past 15 years or so, there has hardly been any teams that won titles with a PG being the #1 player on the team.