Is the Warriors' PG-SG-SF trio the best in the league?

[halfHAVOC]

harris + carter + jefferson

[T-Spot]

-= original quote snipped =-



From 3 so what MONTA ELLIS DOES NOT SHOOT 3's YET
Monta is far far superior finisher at the basket. Have you even ever seen Monta play YOUR ASSUMING to quote your self
So just cuzz Rip shoots better at 3's doesnt mean hes a better shooter in general. If Monta doesnt need to take them why would he if he can finish at the rim at will Why wouldnt he? Montas mid range shot is automatic as is Rips. Rips a better shooter from behind the arc but Montas doesnt shoot them and hes better at finishing at the rim and getting to the rim.

....

Rip is a 60% guy around the basket.

Monta is a 63% guy around the basket.

Far, far superior finisher? Granted, Monta has taken it to the rim twice as much, but a 3% differential is nothing to trumpet about. Monta is a better finisher, but far superior? Seriously, kiddy time is over.

Lets look at jumpers [close and mid range].

Monta : 158 for 351 for 45%

Rip: 241 for 469 for 51%

Hmmm....I wonder if you watch Monta or Rip. The numbers obviously show that Rip is a better shooter in general. Rip also shoots twice as much. So much for being as automatic as Rip.

Three point shooting is no contest. Rip dominates Monta. You're argument is;

Someone who can shooter from farther range is not nessesarly a better shooter than someone who can only shoot at closer range.

Sounds pretty stupid. Seriously read it. Its like saying, "Oh, he can kill ducks from 150 feet out, and I can only do it from 20, but that does not mean he is a better shooter than me."

A three ball is a long range shot. If Rip can make the long range shot, and Monta can't, that means Rip is a better shooter. You could make a case for Monta is he shot better from inside the arc, but Rip beats him soundly in that area too.

Rip shoots much, much, much, better than Monta from long range, and better than Monta from inside the arc. THAT MEANS HE IS A BETTER SHOOTER. No contest.

Monta is a better at getting to the rim and finishing there, [he gets to the rim twice as much, and finishes 3% better] but that number is helped by the up and down system GSW uses.

Your second argument is that Monta does not need to take them, as he can finish at the rim. It would be a better argument if you had said, Monta does not need to take them as GSW's system does not need hm to take threes, [regardless, Monta does not take a lot of treys because he can't, simple as that] but to say that taking a three and finishing the rim are equal is silly. 3 points > 2 point. Do I need to say more?

Conclusion;

Rip is a far superior three point shooter, better shooter in general, plays better defense, while Monta is a slightly better finisher at the rim.

It's stilted towards my argument, yes.

[EvadedHavoc]

harris + carter + jefferson

If Harris pans out the way i expect him to in Jersey and Carter / Jefferson sticks around then this Trio would be top 3 imo

[ajbry]

Rip is better than Monta - whose recent stretch has fooled Warriors fans into placing him a little too high when ranking 2's. I'll take Rip's defense, range, overall awareness, and playoff experience rather than Monta's automatic mid-range J and an uncanny ability to finish anywhere near the rim.

Jack and Baron are only slightly better than Prince and Billups. Stack Jack is more potent offensively and equally a great defender but Prince is simply more consistent. Baron and Chauncey are extremely similar in quite a few different aspects of the game, but overall Baron possesses a little more talent and that pushes him over the top in these type of discussions.

I'd barely take the Warriors but wouldn't hesitate to call the Pistons trio equal, on any given night. They have the rings and production to legitimize being the top trio.

[bill curley II]

I don't think anyones mentioned them, and they're not the best, but Phx's trio of Nash, Barbosa, and Hill should be mentioned as well. Offensively, that's probably as potent and efficient as you can get, just that 2/3 of that trio are total defensive liabilities.

For the long run, I'd take the Warriors trio over Detroit, but even as a Warriors fan, I'd rather take the Pistons trio for the present. Its really not about how much better each player is over their counterpart, but that trio just plays so well and has such a great impact on W/L's, and comparing their supporting casts, I don't think Sheed + bunch of average players is that big of an advantage over what we have with Beans, Al + scrubs.

[The_Believer]

-= original quote snipped =-



From 3 so what MONTA ELLIS DOES NOT SHOOT 3's YET
Monta is far far superior finisher at the basket. Have you even ever seen Monta play YOUR ASSUMING to quote your self
So just cuzz Rip shoots better at 3's doesnt mean hes a better shooter in general. If Monta doesnt need to take them why would he if he can finish at the rim at will Why wouldnt he? Montas mid range shot is automatic as is Rips. Rips a better shooter from behind the arc but Montas doesnt shoot them and hes better at finishing at the rim and getting to the rim.

....

Rip is a 60% guy around the basket.

Monta is a 63% guy around the basket.

Far, far superior finisher? Granted, Monta has taken it to the rim twice as much, but a 3% differential is nothing to trumpet about. Monta is a better finisher, but far superior? Seriously, kiddy time is over.

Lets look at jumpers [close and mid range].

Monta : 158 for 351 for 45%

Rip: 241 for 469 for 51%

Hmmm....I wonder if you watch Monta or Rip. The numbers obviously show that Rip is a better shooter in general. Rip also shoots twice as much. So much for being as automatic as Rip.

Three point shooting is no contest. Rip dominates Monta. You're argument is;

Someone who can shooter from farther range is not nessesarly a better shooter than someone who can only shoot at closer range.

Sounds pretty stupid. Seriously read it. Its like saying, "Oh, he can kill ducks from 150 feet out, and I can only do it from 20, but that does not mean he is a better shooter than me."

A three ball is a long range shot. If Rip can make the long range shot, and Monta can't, that means Rip is a better shooter. You could make a case for Monta is he shot better from inside the arc, but Rip beats him soundly in that area too.

Rip shoots much, much, much, better than Monta from long range, and better than Monta from inside the arc. THAT MEANS HE IS A BETTER SHOOTER. No contest.

Monta is a better at getting to the rim and finishing there, [he gets to the rim twice as much, and finishes 3% better] but that number is helped by the up and down system GSW uses.

Your second argument is that Monta does not need to take them, as he can finish at the rim. It would be a better argument if you had said, Monta does not need to take them as GSW's system does not need hm to take threes, [regardless, Monta does not take a lot of treys because he can't, simple as that] but to say that taking a three and finishing the rim are equal is silly. 3 points > 2 point. Do I need to say more?

Conclusion;

Rip is a far superior three point shooter, better shooter in general, plays better defense, while Monta is a slightly better finisher at the rim.

It's stilted towards my argument, yes.

Rip is maybe/probably a better mid-range shooter and defender, but Monta's penetration and fastbreak ability far surpass Rip's. Monta's top 5 in those aspects.

[Malinhion]

-= original quote snipped =-



Davis = Billups (I'd say he's better but I'm biased)
Monta > Rip
Jack > Prince

Gotta disagree. Giving the first two as equal, I'd definitely rather have the Pistons' proven playoff vets over the explosive Golden State trio.

My honorable mentions go to Dallas, Denver, and New Orleans.

Old trios:
1. Nash+Bell+Marion
2. Kidd+Carter+Jefferson
3. Bibby+Martin+Artest

(in spite of the fact that I hate Nash, Jefferson, and Bibby)

EDIT (after reading page 4): The argument about Rip's strong 3-point percentage is moot. It's not even his strong suit. Hamilton has been known for his midrange j the majority of his career. He's quick and crafty around the basket. The only part of his game that might get overplayed is his defense. But given his playoff-tested ability, there's no question that you take a shooter with icewater in his veins for the playoffs. Rip has been to five straight eastern conference finals. Would you really give him up for Ellis if you're looking to win a title?

[SOUL]

Nelson + Evans + Hedo

[Twinkie defense]

If the Warriors had Rasheed in their frontcourt they'd be a Championship contender. And in the West, not just in the East.

[Luv those Knicks]

The ability to score 20ppg is not that impressive when you cant stop WNBA players from scoring 20ppg as well.

RunTMC wasnt even considered the best of there era so I fail to see how the warrior trio of today who cant even make the playoffs are the best.

Like Charles said "any knuckle head can score"

If you just take PG, SG, SF

I can't think of any trio better than RUnTMC (at the time)

OK, Jordan, Pippen and (hek anybody, how about me), but that's about it.

RunTMC was right up there with the best at those 3 positions. Name me a better one.

[T-Spot]

EDIT (after reading page 4): The argument about Rip's strong 3-point percentage is moot. It's not even his strong suit. Hamilton has been known for his midrange j the majority of his career.

Yes, Rip is known for his automatic mid range J, but this year, his left corner three's are just as automatic.

He has stretched his range out this year, taking around 120 treys, with a high rate of connection. I don't understand how that is a moot point.

Is three point ability a moot point in the NBA? It doesn't matter if he hasn't made a career out of it, but its a weapon he weilds well this year, and is far from a moot point.