Darren Collison ranked 23rd best PG in the league by ESPNs Player/Coach/Excutive board.

[sdballer]

There's 30 teams. That's like saying well Montana is a top 40 state.

Yes, we do have other more glaring weaknesses, I can see us scratching at the 8th seed soon, but DC isn't the impactful point guard you need if you're aiming at any type of glorified success. Crucial position. You need a floor general who makes his team better, can score when needed, etc. etc.

Well, he is no mario Chalmers, Derrick fisher or washed up Jason kidd.

 

[hrdboild]

That kinda sounds like Tyreke Evans

You had to say it didn't you?

 

[VF21]

I want to see how DC plays under George Karl's leadership before I start clamoring for an immediate upgrade at the 1. I, too, think we've got bigger areas of need than at the point guard slot.

 

[PoundForPound]

I want to see how DC plays under George Karl's leadership before I start clamoring for an immediate upgrade at the 1. I, too, think we've got bigger areas of need than at the point guard slot.

I can dig this. I too want to see Karl's effect on DC, I'm hoping he elevates his game such as how Rudy has been able to. We will see. With that said, if the right deal presents itself during the offseason, I wouldn't hesitate to include him.

 

[twslam07]

Yes, we do have other more glaring weaknesses, I can see us scratching at the 8th seed soon, but DC isn't the impactful point guard you need if you're aiming at any type of glorified success. Crucial position. You need a floor general who makes his team better, can score when needed, etc. etc.

Teams can be successful in multiple ways. There's not one way to build a winner.

Collison gets the ball to the right people in good spots. We can't have max players at every position...

 

[Gary]

Collison is a good spot starter, but an even better bench player. I would like to keep him here and for him to come off the bench, but I wouldn't be devastated if he was our starting PG.

 

[VF21]

Teams can be successful in multiple ways. There's not one way to build a winner.

Collison gets the ball to the right people in good spots. We can't have max players at every position...

Exactly right.

 

[Bricklayer]

Bang for buck is Ray a better BACKUP than Collison? I like Collison's game but I would explore trading him sure.

Absolutely not.

The Ray fascination remains odd. Collison was a 6th man of the year candidate as a backup.

However, for what he does he's near the top of his class of PGs anyway, so setting aside my Rubio scenario, he's probably the starter. For Collison to be a backup, you want it to be somebody he can logically spend some time playing alongside of. The Clips did run he and CP3 together at times, but that's ridiculously tiny.

 

[Kingster]

Collison is in the upper tier of the mediocre starting point guards. You're never going past the first round of the playoffs with him, unless he's coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game. This team needs a dynamic outstanding talent at the point, not a bland mediocre complement to Cousins. It would be nice to have a guard who can create his own shot whenever he wants so that he can hit big shots at the end of games with little time on the clock. That's an All Star talent I'm talking about, not a mid-level FA, a freaking fantastic All Star. Sign me up for that!

 

[VF21]

Collison is in the upper tier of the mediocre starting point guards. You're never going past the first round of the playoffs with him, unless he's coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game. This team needs a dynamic outstanding talent at the point, not a bland mediocre complement to Cousins. It would be nice to have a guard who can create his own shot whenever he wants so that he can hit big shots at the end of games with little time on the clock. That's an All Star talent I'm talking about, not a mid-level FA, a freaking fantastic All Star. Sign me up for that!

It would be terrific to have All-Stars at all 5 starting positions. In real life, however, it doesn't happen because of silly little things like the salary cap.

 

[rhythmless]

Collison is in the upper tier of the mediocre starting point guards. You're never going past the first round of the playoffs with him, unless he's coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game. This team needs a dynamic outstanding talent at the point, not a bland mediocre complement to Cousins. It would be nice to have a guard who can create his own shot whenever he wants so that he can hit big shots at the end of games with little time on the clock. That's an All Star talent I'm talking about, not a mid-level FA, a freaking fantastic All Star. Sign me up for that!

Why don't you go ahead and throw some names out for all these all star pgs that teams would like to trade to us for our collective pile of filth.

 

[Bricklayer]

Collison is in the upper tier of the mediocre starting point guards. You're never going past the first round of the playoffs with him, unless he's coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game.

Indeed. After all:

Well, he is no mario Chalmers, Derrick fisher or washed up Jason kidd.

Having an elite PG is just about the very LEAST important thing you can have when pursuing an NBA title. There's almost no evidence for it at all.

Elite "scoring PGs" aren't really succeeding or failing as PGs anyway. They are just the current version of "stars", that guy every team needs to be their #1 goto guy. They succeed, or in every case so far do NOT succeed, based on how they compare to the other team's star, whatever position he may play. And hey, if that's your star, you gotta try to roll with it. But it hasn't happened even one time yet.

And amongst the rest of the field, Collison is fine. The really creative guys don't help your stars much, they help your roleplayers.

And BTW, may I just note this entire conversation is RIDICULOUS. There should be a ban on ever starting a thread looking to upgrade offensive personnel until the moment in time when our team finally finishes in the top half of the league on the other end, on DEFENSE.

 

[Kingster]

It would be terrific to have All-Stars at all 5 starting positions. In real life, however, it doesn't happen because of silly little things like the salary cap.

Rubbish! Tell that to OKC. Tell that to Golden State. You can have two All Star talents on your team. At one point, OKC had THREE All Star talents, when yes, they did have to eventually make a deal to unload one. Why don't we aim for THAT? Let's be soo freaking talented that we have to unload one of them for several #1s and a good player with an under-market contract. What a terrible problem that would be. Then the Kings might actually compete in the West for something other than crumbs. I get that this board is sooo beaten down by the cascade of failure over the past decade, but that doesn't have stop our new "esteemed" management team from thinking big.

 

[VF21]

Rubbish! Tell that to OKC. Tell that to Golden State. You can have two All Star talents on your team. At one point, OKC had THREE All Star talents, when yes, they did have to eventually make a deal to unload one. Why don't we aim for THAT? Let's be soo freaking talented that we have to unload one of them for several #1s and a good player with an under-market contract. What a terrible problem that would be. Then the Kings might actually compete in the West for something other than crumbs. I get that this board is sooo beaten down by the cascade of failure over the past decade, but that doesn't have stop our new "esteemed" management team from thinking big.

I said you cannot have all-stars at all 5 positions. I do not think having an all-star PG is the best way for US to climb the ladder. I would much rather see us get a top tier talent to share the frontcourt with Cosuins. That's what I would like to aim for.

 

[PoundForPound]

Indeed. After all:


Having an elite PG is just about the very LEAST important thing you can have when pursuing an NBA title. There's almost no evidence for it at all.

Elite "scoring PGs" aren't really succeeding or failing as PGs anyway. They are just the current version of "stars", that guy every team needs to be their #1 goto guy. They succeed, or in every case so far do NOT succeed, based on how they compare to the other team's star, whatever position he may play. And hey, if that's your star, you gotta try to roll with it. But it hasn't happened even one time yet.

And amongst the rest of the field, Collison is fine. The really creative guys don't help your stars much, they help your roleplayers.

And BTW, may I just note this entire conversation is RIDICULOUS. There should be a ban on ever starting a thread looking to upgrade offensive personnel until the moment in time when our team finally finishes in the top half of the league on the other end, on DEFENSE.

 

[KingMilz]

Not really. He's a top 20 pg and more importantly he's the best "available" fit with our roster.

We've got much bigger problems to solve.

He's also comes damn cheap $$ wise which will give us more flexibility in signing a PF/SF depending where Rudy is going to play in Karl's system

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

You're right: Westbrook, Curry, Irving, Paul, Lillard and Wall have quite the impressive collection of rings, indeed. How silly for anyone to suggest otherwise.

 

[PoundForPound]

You're right: Westbrook, Curry, Irving, Paul, Lillard and Wall have quite the impressive collection of rings, indeed. How silly for anyone to suggest otherwise.

To say that a point guard is the "least" possible thing to be worried about when going after a title is foolish. Your list is meaningless, Citrus, only one team can win a championship at a time of course all those guys wont have rings, and the Spurs, led by Tony Parker, have a bunch of'em.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

To say that a point guard is the "least" possible thing to be worried about when going after a title is foolish. Your list is meaningless, Citrus, only one team can win a championship at a time of course all those guys wont have rings, and the Spurs, led by Tony Parker, have a bunch of'em.

Do you know how to post without putting spin on what other people say? Do we need to type up a tutorial for you? Quit pretending that the word "elite" was not an essential part of the post you quoted, as if taking that word out doesn't change the meaning of the sentence you bolded. You can try to act slick, and front like the post you quoted said "a point guard is the 'least' possible thing to be worried about", but the rest of us can all read. Taking the word "elite" out of that sentence dramatically changes the meaning of that sentence, and you ought to know better.

And yeah, Tony Parker does indeed "have a bunch" of championships. He was only an "elite" point guard for two of them. He is also not the player the Spurs are built around, and never has been; neither is he the guy who was brought in to be #2 option.

 

[sdballer]

To say that a point guard is the "least" possible thing to be worried about when going after a title is foolish. Your list is meaningless, Citrus, only one team can win a championship at a time of course all those guys wont have rings, and the Spurs, led by Tony Parker, have a bunch of'em.

I'm not sure you're understanding your own argument

 

[PoundForPound]

Do you know how to post without putting spin on what other people say? Do we need to type up a tutorial for you? Quit pretending that the word "elite" was not an essential part of the post you quoted, as if taking that word out doesn't change the meaning of the sentence you bolded. You can try to act slick, and front like the post you quoted said "a point guard is the 'least' possible thing to be worried about", but the rest of us can all read. Taking the word "elite" out of that sentence dramatically changes the meaning of that sentence, and you ought to know better.

And yeah, Tony Parker does indeed "have a bunch" of championships. He was only an "elite" point guard for two of them.

If you really don't think that the PG position if crucial to a team's success, ask just about any team in the playoffs right now in the West. They may not all have rings, but I'll be damned if any of those squads told you that with Darren Collison starting as PG for them, they'd be in the same position. I'm saying that we need a better starting PG, that's all. No need to feel offended or get feisty just because we don't agree.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

If you really don't think that the PG position if crucial to a team's success, ask just about any team in the playoffs right now in the West. They may not all have rings, but I'll be damned if any of those squads told you that with Darren Collison starting as PG for them, they'd be in the same position. I'm saying that we need a better starting PG, that's all. No need to feel offended or get feisty just because we don't agree.

There's a game going on. If you don't understand the difference between what I typed, and what you think I typed, I don't have time to explain it to you right now.

 

[sdballer]

If you really don't think that the PG position if crucial to a team's success, ask just about any team in the playoffs right now in the West. They may not all have rings, but I'll be damned if any of those squads told you that with Darren Collison starting as PG for them, they'd be in the same position. I'm saying that we need a better starting PG, that's all. No need to feel offended or get feisty just because we don't agree.

This argument started when you suggested that in order to have glorified success, not just making the playoffs, you needed a top pg. now that we are using facts to suggest otherwise, you appear to be confused with what you were arguing.

The facts suggest that having a top 10 pg is not necessary to have "glorified success".

Also, how do you suppose we would even acquire one of those top 10-15 PGs?

 

[SacramentoKings]

Beginning in 2000 (15 seasons), the following teams have won championships without a marquee PG:

Lakers 5x
Heat 3x
Mavs 1x

That's 9/15.

For the remaining 7, you have the Spurs with Parker (4), the Big 3 Celtics feat. Rondo (1), and the "all All-Stars" Pistons (1).

The majority of champions have not had great PGs, and the all-star PGs won were on great TEAMS that were stacked at other positions.

LOL

The Lakers had arguably the best player of all time and one of the most dominant centers of all time.

The Heat had another arguably greatest player of all time, and two other top players from their generation.

 

[sdballer]

LOL

The Lakers had arguably the best player of all time and one of the most dominant centers of all time.

The Heat had another arguably greatest player of all time, and two other top players from their generation.

I'll play along. With the exception of Parker and Westbrook, none of the other top 10 PGs from that list (minus 1 appearance from Conley) have even played in a conference finals.

 

[LPKingsFan]

LOL

The Lakers had arguably the best player of all time and one of the most dominant centers of all time.

The Heat had another arguably greatest player of all time, and two other top players from their generation.

If you're going to narrow your definition of success to winning a ring, it's always going to come down to something like this. Hard to draw any other conclusions one way or another from the small sample of title winning teams, IMO.

 

[Spike]

LOL

The Lakers had arguably the best player of all time and one of the most dominant centers of all time.

The Heat had another arguably greatest player of all time, and two other top players from their generation.

Where can we find a generational talent? Sign me up!

 

[PoundForPound]

There's a game going on. If you don't understand the difference between what I typed, and what you think I typed, I don't have time to explain it to you right now.

Lol, I've come to the conclusion that you are way too sensitive. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you have to use google images to try and offend someone, lol. What are we, 5th graders, citrus? My argument is that Darren Collison isn't good enough to be the starting PG of a team whose hope is to make it any further than the first round of the playoffs. After all, this thread is about DC. There's a reason he's ranked near the bottom of starting PG's in this league. I love his tenacity and heart, but let's be honest, he should be coming off the bench,

 

[jcwkings]

Not really. He's a top 20 pg and more importantly he's the best "available" fit with our roster.

We've got much bigger problems to solve.

He may be worse than most starting PG's but our starting Center is WAY better than 80 percent of the league and out SF is a top 5-7 for his position(Lebron, Durant, Leonard, George, Melo and then Gay is right below them). With money saved at PG the obvious weak spot is PF. Landry will be un loaded if possible, who knows about JT. WCS would be a huge get for us if we dont get in the top 3.

 

[rhythmless]

Lol, I've come to the conclusion that you are way too sensitive. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you have to use google images to try and offend someone, lol. What are we, 5th graders, citrus? My argument is that Darren Collison isn't good enough to be the starting PG of a team whose hope is to make it any further than the first round of the playoffs. After all, this thread is about DC. There's a reason he's ranked near the bottom of starting PG's in this league. I love his tenacity and heart, but let's be honest, he should be coming off the bench,

And what are plausible scenarios to upgrade the point guard spot?

There are different classes of point guards. If you get a superstar, you can disregard classes and types for the most part. Failing that, you shouldn't be looking for the best point guard, but the best fit.