If you're a NBA GM, are you drafting a dominant PG, or a NBA-ready big man?

Originally Posted by jamergrady


2004: Jameer Nelson
2007: Aaron Brooks
Click to expand...
Nelson was like the 20th pick and Brooks was a late 1st rounder, I only included players taken in the top 10 because a top 10 pick can make or break your franchise. Even if you miss on a late first rounder, it won't hurt as bad because you're probably not building around that player in the first place. If they pan out then that's just a plus to go with your core.
 
Originally Posted by Three6mafia2007

the PGs seem to have a better chance of living up to their expectations in the NBA, so im goin with that
Click to expand...

That seems to be the trend now adays
 
Big man...Look at D. Howard, he ain't even %%+% compared to the center's of the 90's but off sheer athleticism alone he is going to be one of the most 2 or 3 dominant players over the next decade. The NBA is a guard's league now definitly, but big men still win. Kobe ain't get %%+% until Gasol was there.
 
Originally Posted by starscream211

ok i got one...

tim duncan talent or magic johnson talent?

thats a dominant big man and a dominat pg... who would u choose?
Click to expand...
thats not fair ... Magic was a 6'9" point ... and a one of a kind player
 
Big man.

Immediately, I assume you're thinking Wall vs. Cousins, you may or may not be, but in that case, Cousins. Wall is not a "dominant PG" in terms of what he'll do in the NBA. Derrick Rose isn't a dominant PG, and I'd take him over Wall anyday, and I by NO MEANS am a Derrick Rose fan.

My friend brought up a good point the other day when this discussion came up over a game of poker.

Name ONE TEAM in the last 30 years that won the NBA Finals with their most dominant player being a point guard. Like the above says, Magic doesn't count because the dude was on super-talented teams and was also a 6'9 PG, and that Pistons team was the definition of a 5 man team, so even though Chauncey got the MVP, he was no more important than any of those other guys, in regards to the fact that any one of those 5 guys aren't there, they don't win. Same can be said when they won with Isiah.

I can't think of a single team.
 
The lack of quality big men in today's game would make me pass on the pg. IMO, it being a pg era makes it more important to have a quality big.
 
Originally Posted by Ricardo Malta

Lol, clearly you talkin' Wall vs Cousins. You've been hinting at this topic for the last couple days now.

I take dominant guard. They have the ball in their hands more so impact will be bigger from the jump. Also makes others around them better.
Click to expand...
nerd.gif


laugh.gif


But looking at the list of NBA champs over the years, the only "combo" guard to win the chip' was Dwayne Wade. There have been other great PG's to win a championship like Tony Parker, but the differing variable in all of those guys getting rings was a dominant big man (Shaq/Duncan).  Maybe you can make a case for Chauncey Billups (and I think it was too early for Rondo), but I just thing having a dominant big man is the difference in more cases than not, between winning/losing a championship.  I think from a team building standpoint, you start with a big man...from there see what other pieces you can add around him through either FA or later on in the draft.  Tony Parker wasn't a high pick, Billups was up/down before figuring it out with the Pistons, arguments can be made as to whether or not Wade would have won the chip had it not been for Shaq, etc etc...

But on the flip you have teams over the years like LA, Chicago, who weren't built around a dominant big-man or PG...but still had ridiculous amounts of success.  I think you would have to go back to the bad-boys era of the Pistons to find a champion who had smaller players (not necessairly focused on the big...but had RIDICULOUS guys on the wings) who made things work to a degree that they eventually became champs. 

I dunno...
laugh.gif
 
Ok but what dominant big man has won a championship, yet alone carried their team to an NBA Final without a dominant pg?

Dominant PGs taking their squad to the Finals: AI has and to a lesser extent, Jason Kidd. Hell you could make a case for Lebron as he carried alot of the playmaking duties in 2007. Let's not forget he was drafted to be a big PG.
 
Originally Posted by Ricardo Malta

Ok but what dominant big man has won a championship, yet alone carried their team to an NBA Final without a dominant pg?

Dominant PGs taking their squad to the Finals: AI has and to a lesser extent, Jason Kidd. Hell you could make a case for Lebron as he carried alot of the playmaking duties in 2007. Let's not forget he was drafted to be a big PG.
Click to expand...
It goes both ways, NBA championship teams share a couple things in common, 1 of them being, there two best players are a big and a small, there are a couple exceptions like Jordan and Pippen, but for alot of championships it still rings true.
 
Originally Posted by Ricardo Malta

Ok but what dominant big man has won a championship, yet alone carried their team to an NBA Final without a dominant pg?

Dominant PGs taking their squad to the Finals: AI has and to a lesser extent, Jason Kidd. Hell you could make a case for Lebron as he carried alot of the playmaking duties in 2007. Let's not forget he was drafted to be a big PG.
Click to expand...

Hakeem Olajuwon did it, Shaq did it (although he had Kobe and Wade but they're scorers, not point guards), Patrick Ewing did it, Tim Duncan and David Robinson in 1999 and you could make the case for Tim Duncan before Tony Parker became an all star. Not only that, but Shaq dominated Allen Iverson's team in the finals and Tim Duncan beat both Kidd's Nets and Lebron's Cavs in the finals.
 
Dwight Howard brought the Magic to the championship. Didn't win, but, still.

Duncan, Shaq (Lakers + Heat), etc.

Big men command a double team on offense, opening up the offense for slashing 2 guards/PG's, or, opens up the offense for shooters.

And on the other end of the court, they clog the paint, alter shots, etc.

A big man just brings more to the table.
 
Again, all those teams had at least one more dominant player on their team. Shaq had Kobe and Wade, Akeem had Clyde, Dwight had Turk and Rashard, Duncan had Robinson and then Tony and Ginobili.

Again, my point is, how many big men, as of late, have carried their team to at least the Finals, without another imposing player? Again, AI did it and to a lesser extent Kidd and Lebron. Kidd had talent around him but let's be honest, he ELEVATED the play of Kenyon, Jefferson, etc. Same as Lebron. Did Dwight do that last year? Nah, those wings were the real reason they made it that far. Would Orlando have made it that far with Battie at center? Nope, but that just shows a great big and great guard/wing go hand in hand, but a great guard/wing has a bigger impact.
 
No big man or dominant PG brings their team to a championship alone. Everybody needs help.

But if you look at the past 20 years, a dominant big man helps a lot more than a dominant PG.

Especially in actually winning a 'ship.
 
The dominant PG. Too many teams have been burned by drafting "NBA-ready" big men due to the fact that they're big men. See: Oden over Durant, Bogut over Williams and Paul, etc.
 
Originally Posted by Banks2Pierce

Everyone says in the modern league, but the recent champs have been dominant inside. It goes back until MJ, imo.
Click to expand...

The way I see it, you do need to be dominanat inside. However, how many times has a championship been won by one player? With that said, in today's league I think it would be far more difficult to find a dominant PG who will get the ball to the right place at the right time as opposed to finding a frontcourt that will be suitable. I mean for the love of god, the Mavericks refused to make a deal with the Wizards unless Brendan Haywood was involved. If that doesn't indicate that today's NBA is a little man's league, I don't know what does. (Really, the game is dominated by wing players, thanks to MJ. This was the whole "One superstar and a bunch of bums" formula from the late '90s - early '00s).

Also, how many recent champs have "drafted" their front court? The way I see it, in today's league, you draft wings highest, PGs next, and worry about trading for bigs once they've proven their worth.
 
Good point about bigs via free agency. Big man takes longer to develop than a guard, IMO, especially in today's game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest News

View All News

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

Site contents may not be incorporated into AI training data or any other derivative works without prior express written consent.

Links to participating merchants may generate referral or affiliate commissions that help support our community. See our policies for details. NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom