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

[Phrazbit]

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).

How about the 2004 Pistons? They won a title and nearly won a 2nd a year later with Chauncy stinking Billups as their best player.

Unless you happen to have the league's best player on your roster then you build a great team and hope you get those certain strokes of luck that a title winner needs. And even last year, the team with the unquestioned best player in the league came within a missed free throw and a stinking rebound from being beaten by... a team with a point guard as their best player.

 

[Gaddabout]

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

I'm saying I don't think Bledsoe ever gets the best of that matchup in a 7-game series, because he can't shoot. I don't think he can even play to a draw. He's among the Top 20 at his position, but that's where I think the line is drawn for him. I don't see him getting better.

 

[sunsfan88]

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).

I'm saying I don't think Bledsoe ever gets the best of that matchup in a 7-game series, because he can't shoot. I don't think he can even play to a draw. He's among the Top 20 at his position, but that's where I think the line is drawn for him. I don't see him getting better.

Eric Bledsoe vs Parker this season:

Parker: 20 pts on 9/15 shooting, 6 assists, 1 turnover
Bledsoe: 15 pts on 6/12 shooting, 5 assists, 0 turnovers

Eric Bledsoe vs Russel Westbrook

Westbrook: 21 pts on 5/16 shooting, 7 assists, 4 rebounds, 4 turnovers
Bledsoe: 26 pts on 7/17 shooting, 14 assists, 7 rebounds, 8 turnovers

I'm not sure that either Westbrook over Parker dominated Bledsoe in their matchups like you say they did. As a matter of fact, I think Bledsoe performed about as good or very close to as good as them in the games.

Of course this is just based on 2 games but that's all we have at this point.

 

[AzStevenCal]

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

Notice that I said "arguably". I'm quite certain that you can find support for Westbrook being the best player on his team. You'll find more support for Durant but watch them play and it's hard to say that Westbrook isn't the alpha dog of that group.

Steve

 

[sunsfan88]

Notice that I said "arguably". I'm quite certain that you can find support for Westbrook being the best player on his team. You'll find more support for Durant but watch them play and it's hard to say that Westbrook isn't the alpha dog of that group.

Steve

How so? Durant is more efficient and much more skilled and talented than Westbrook.

There's a reason why Kevin Durant is the 2nd best player in the NBA. That's a hard label to earn.

 

[AzStevenCal]

How so? Durant is more efficient and much more skilled and talented than Westbrook.

There's a reason why Kevin Durant is the 2nd best player in the NBA. That's a hard label to earn.

Again, arguably. Not inarguably. I too consider Durant to be a better player than Westbrook but there is room for debate. Westbrook appears to have more of that killer mentality. Is it enough to make up for the pure beauty of Durant's game? I don't think so but I wouldn't laugh someone out of the room for feeling it did.

Steve

 

[AzStevenCal]

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.

I agree with most of this. Despite what some have said there is every reason to expect improvement from Bledsoe as he gains experience. He's only logged 4,000 minutes in his career and he's still just 23 years old (for a few more weeks). Even if he doesn't improve, the Bledsoe we've seen has been playing at an All Star, perhaps even All NBA level. I hold to my position that it's harder to win it all with a PG as your clear cut best player but it's far from impossible and just because he's our best player today doesn't mean we can't add or develop another star player.

The one part I'd disagree with is the group of players you think are strong possibilities to be part of our future. I think Marcus is going to develop into a decent player and I'm now convinced Markieff will be in the all star conversation for the next decade. I've bought into this group hook, line and sinker I guess but I really think Markieff is showing us the real Kieff. Unless we're dead set on tanking and choose to move the twins before this deadline I think they are long term Suns. From what I understand they really want to stay close to each other. I believe they'd be motivated to staying some place where they are already united rather than trying to make it happen elsewhere.

I also think there's a fair chance that Archie will still be with us. He looks lost out there and I think people are already starting to forget about him but he was always a long term (and long shot) prospect. He still has 9 more months as a teenager and he's still sitting there with unlimited potential. I can't think of a good reason to give up on him in the next 5 years as long as his head is on straight. Not that I have any idea where his "head" is at.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

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

I confess I had forgotten about the Mavericks' title, so yes, it can happen. Even there, though, Nowitzki was at least a former top-three player (or top-five, anyway), so you could make some sort of argument about how he was able to channel the past or something. Not very convincing, I know.

So, I'll fall back to a less complicated position, which is that I don't think Bledsoe has much chance of being a top-ten player. As others have pointed out, he's stuck behind Westbrook and Irving, at least, for the bulk of his career, and that's just looking at other PGs.

 

[JCSunsfan]

Back to the original issues: Besides anecdotal historical precedent, why is it that a team cannot win a championship with a pg as their best player? What is exactly about the game of basketball now, that makes it different from the Magic Johnson/Isiah Thomas days?

 

[elindholm]

Back to the original issues: Besides anecdotal historical precedent, why is it that a team cannot win a championship with a pg as their best player?

They can, if the PG is also one of the league's best players. But Johnson won while playing alongside (at least?) two other hall-of-famers, and Thomas won during an era in which the league was figuring out for the first time that "defense" (read: more fouling) in the playoffs is somehow good for the game's image.

As for current players, Rose with the Bulls is a possibility, but that team can't stay healthy enough to make a serious charge. The Clippers aren't contenders. Westbrook is great, but Durant is still the #1 there.

 

[Chaplin]

I'm saying I don't think Bledsoe ever gets the best of that matchup in a 7-game series, because he can't shoot. I don't think he can even play to a draw. He's among the Top 20 at his position, but that's where I think the line is drawn for him. I don't see him getting better.

And I don't see how you can come to that conclusion after such a small sample size. If you are using this short season so far as your barometer, then you have to use his numbers against Tony Parker as a huge positive.

I just don't understand how you can say he definitely won't get any better.

 

[Superbone]

And I don't see how you can come to that conclusion after such a small sample size. If you are using this short season so far as your barometer, then you have to use his numbers against Tony Parker as a huge positive.

I just don't understand how you can say he definitely won't get any better.

Because Parker never got any better... Oh, wait. Yes he did. He improved his shooting immensely. Hmm. I wonder if Bledsoe could do the same. Nah.

Seriously, Bled's shot in the fourth quarter has been money. If he continues to hone his shot, the sky's the limit.

 

[Gaddabout]

And I don't see how you can come to that conclusion after such a small sample size. If you are using this short season so far as your barometer, then you have to use his numbers against Tony Parker as a huge positive.

I just don't understand how you can say he definitely won't get any better.

Oh, sure, he COULD improve, but it's highly unlikely. Bledsoe turns 24 in December. He's approaching middle age for a basketball player. He's always going to be 6-1, so he's not going to become a better on-ball defender, and players at that age almost never improve their shooting as much as he need to improve his shooting. Hornacek is the only guy I've ever seen do that to the extreme. I see Bledsoe and I think he is what he is right now. I don't see any reason for hope that it will be better.

In a playoff game against another elite guard, I think Bledsoe gets some numbers but loses the war. I don't understand why anyone would think he would become Tony Parker. Parker made the leap from .419 to .464 shooting percentage between ages 19 and 20. He shot .447 at 21 and .482 at 22. He has never shot less than that the rest of his career. If Bledsoe continues his FG percentage in that range this year, maybe I will change my tune, because he shares Parker's limited 3-point range. It's just very, very, very unlikely any guard shoots 60% from 2-point range over a season. He's much more likely to fall back to below 50%, which would drop his overall numbers to career numbers. They will still be career highs, but he looks like a 45 percent shooter to me.

 

[CardsSunsDbacks]

I'm saying I don't think Bledsoe ever gets the best of that matchup in a 7-game series, because he can't shoot. I don't think he can even play to a draw. He's among the Top 20 at his position, but that's where I think the line is drawn for him. I don't see him getting better.

I think that statement is ridiculous. Bledsoe is 23 years old and is starting for the first time in his career. You also say that it is because he can't shoot (which is bologna IMO), but even if he isn't a good shooter that is certainly a part of his game that can improve through hard work. It's not exactly like Parker is a good shooter either.

 

[Chaplin]

Oh, sure, he COULD improve, but it's highly unlikely. Bledsoe turns 24 in December. He's approaching middle age for a basketball player. He's always going to be 6-1, so he's not going to become a better on-ball defender, and players at that age almost never improve their shooting as much as he need to improve his shooting. Hornacek is the only guy I've ever seen do that to the extreme. I see Bledsoe and I think he is what he is right now. I don't see any reason for hope that it will be better.

In a playoff game against another elite guard, I think Bledsoe gets some numbers but loses the war. I don't understand why anyone would think he would become Tony Parker. Parker made the leap from .419 to .464 shooting percentage between ages 19 and 20. He shot .447 at 21 and .482 at 22. He has never shot less than that the rest of his career. If Bledsoe continues his FG percentage in that range this year, maybe I will change my tune, because he shares Parker's limited 3-point range. It's just very, very, very unlikely any guard shoots 60% from 2-point range over a season. He's much more likely to fall back to below 50%, which would drop his overall numbers to career numbers. They will still be career highs, but he looks like a 45 percent shooter to me.

Again, the entire basis of your argument isn't very relevant. He has never been in the type of situation he is in now--and he's only been in 7 games in that situation.

Do you not think that being a regular backup affects his numbers? Go ask Grant Hill, it definitely makes a difference.

Bledsoe will never be Tony Parker, because, well, he's Eric Bledsoe, but I see NO evidence at all that he will never achieve that same level. At the end of the year, if you want to place this argument, then sure, you'd have some solid ammunition. But right now, limited minutes in a backup role is completely different than what he is getting used to right now.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Watching Bledsoe play it's clear to me that he is a difference maker. I watch his shot and AFAIC, the only thing wrong with it is shot selection. I think he'll improve his numbers with regular play and IMO he will be one of the better 3 point shooters at the PG position. We already know he can penetrate and dish, now we just need to see if he can generate offense for the team when the defense takes away the drives. So far, this looks to be his biggest weakness. Anyway, whether he becomes the offensive weapon that Parker is doesn't really matter. When you factor in his defense, he's pretty darned close to that level already and he looks better with each start.

Steve

 

[Gaddabout]

I think that statement is ridiculous. Bledsoe is 23 years old and is starting for the first time in his career. You also say that it is because he can't shoot (which is bologna IMO), but even if he isn't a good shooter that is certainly a part of his game that can improve through hard work. It's not exactly like Parker is a good shooter either.

Bledsoe is good around the basket. The further he gets away from the basket the more average he becomes. This isn't just my opinion. The numbers bear it out. It's also why Dragic is in a similar boat.

 

[Gaddabout]

Again, the entire basis of your argument isn't very relevant. He has never been in the type of situation he is in now--and he's only been in 7 games in that situation.

Do you not think that being a regular backup affects his numbers? Go ask Grant Hill, it definitely makes a difference.

Bledsoe will never be Tony Parker, because, well, he's Eric Bledsoe, but I see NO evidence at all that he will never achieve that same level. At the end of the year, if you want to place this argument, then sure, you'd have some solid ammunition. But right now, limited minutes in a backup role is completely different than what he is getting used to right now.

If his 3-point shooting were on an upward arc -- or just as good as last year's excellent 39.7 -- I'd be right there with you. It's not. It's just shy of awful.

I'm saying, "Show me." Until then, I'm very, very skeptical. Until then, from what I've seen, if he's not at his ceiling right now, he can touch it from where he's at.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Bledsoe is good around the basket. The further he gets away from the basket the more average he becomes. This isn't just my opinion. The numbers bear it out. It's also why Dragic is in a similar boat.

Bledsoe shot 40% from three point range last year.

Steve

 

[AzStevenCal]

If his 3-point shooting were on an upward arc -- or just as good as last year's excellent 39.7 -- I'd be right there with you. It's not. It's just shy of awful.

I'm saying, "Show me." Until then, I'm very, very skeptical. Until then, from what I've seen, if he's not at his ceiling right now, he can touch it from where he's at.

It seems to me that you are discounting his 3 point shot despite the fact he improved greatly from season 2 to season 3 simply because he's started off poorly this season. And yet you're discounting his improvement this season in other areas because it's only been 7 games. Watch him play and tell me you don't think he can be a good shooter from 3 point range. He has taken most of the last second shots this season and unlike a lot of players he really does get them up in time without concern for his percentages. He still needs to improve his mid-range shot off the dribble but when he squares up he looks like a shooter to me.

Steve

 

[elindholm]

Do you not think that being a regular backup affects his numbers? Go ask Grant Hill, it definitely makes a difference.

Hill shot slightly better as a backup than as a starter.

 

[Cheesebeef]

no, but I do think he can be a great #2 or maybe even a 1b. Still gonna need a transcendent player down low or on the wing to have our great 1-2 punch and I think we'd be better served with a PF to match him up with. Bledsoe looks like a guy who needs the ball to be effective and a wing-player might make that a little hinky.

it's really too bad he's not 2 inches taller. if he was, we'd be looking at a Dwayne Wade/Westbrook type talent. That being said, he's still REALLY damn good and a great piece to start building around.

if somehow Len ends up being a healthy/decent C, if they got a stud PF to go along with him and Bledsoe, you'd have the makings of a really, really tough squad for a decade.

 

[Gaddabout]

It seems to me that you are discounting his 3 point shot despite the fact he improved greatly from season 2 to season 3 simply because he's started off poorly this season. And yet you're discounting his improvement this season in other areas because it's only been 7 games. Watch him play and tell me you don't think he can be a good shooter from 3 point range. He has taken most of the last second shots this season and unlike a lot of players he really does get them up in time without concern for his percentages. He still needs to improve his mid-range shot off the dribble but when he squares up he looks like a shooter to me.

Steve

He didn't improve his shot, though. He had better opportunities last year so he shot better. As a primary option, he's shooting back where he was before last year -- he's shooting the kind of shots he shot early in his career (i.e. early in the sets, top of arc).

His best games this season so far have been when he's focused on getting to the rim and let the 3-pointers come in the flow. When he's forcing it, he's not been good.

 

[elindholm]

Bledsoe's decision-making can improve, and that would help his overall FG%. I don't have an explanation for why he's not a better three-point shooter. Marbury, who was also bad from deep, had an ugly shooting mechanic that I was always skeptical of. Bledsoe's doesn't look that problematic to me, but I haven't been paying very careful attention.

 

[82CardsGrad]

Bledsoe's decision-making can improve, and that would help his overall FG%. I don't have an explanation for why he's not a better three-point shooter. Marbury, who was also bad from deep, had an ugly shooting mechanic that I was always skeptical of. Bledsoe's doesn't look that problematic to me, but I haven't been paying very careful attention.

I believe his FG% overall, including from 3 point range, will steadily improve under Hornacek. Not sure he will ever be an elite shooter, but he'll improve.

And for the record, I don't believe he'll ever be a #1 on a Championship team. I love the kid and think he is an increible athletic talent. And I think he can be a very nice contributer on a championship team... But IMHO, I don't see him as a legit #1 on that type of team.