RealGM

How does a healthy 1968 version of Connie Hawkins do with the 77 champion Trailblazers instead of Bill Walton?

Neck and neck with the Kings for the last playoff spot, probably losing

wojoaderge wrote:Neck and neck with the Kings for the last playoff spot, probably losing

Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

Connie did play center for the 1st ABA champion though at the time we all felt he was truly a forward, and was well on his way again when he blew out his knee. He came back at about 80-90% and was 1st team All-NBA playing combo forward with Phoenix then blew out a knee again and declined fairly rapidly playing mainly a passing hub center style.

Offensively, his greater range and better outside passing (though not the interior passer that Walton was) and handling would give Jack Ramsey's teams probably better offense than with Walton. Centers couldn't guard him so they would probably use the center on Maurice Lucas who was a nice passing big man with a decent midrange himself. Defensively, they would be vulnerable to Kareem (Gilmore wasn't in the league yet and there were no other giants you had to worry about as the next best centers were guys like Cowens, Hayes, and Sikma) but otherwise should be fine although he wasn't the defender that Walton was.

I'd put them at contender status, maybe better in regular season as Walton missed a 5th of the year with his ongoing foot issues, but probably have LA as the title favorite with Portland in a pretty decent sized group of contenders. Of course I had LA as the title favorite over Portland with Walton too.

penbeast0 wrote:Connie did play center for the 1st ABA champion though at the time we all felt he was truly a forward, and was well on his way again when he blew out his knee. He came back at about 80-90% and was 1st team All-NBA playing combo forward with Phoenix then blew out a knee again and declined fairly rapidly playing mainly a passing hub center style.

Offensively, his greater range and better outside passing (though not the interior passer that Walton was) and handling would give Jack Ramsey's teams probably better offense than with Walton. Centers couldn't guard him so they would probably use the center on Maurice Lucas who was a nice passing big man with a decent midrange himself. Defensively, they would be vulnerable to Kareem (Gilmore wasn't in the league yet and there were no other giants you had to worry about as the next best centers were guys like Cowens, Hayes, and Sikma) but otherwise should be fine although he wasn't the defender that Walton was.

I'd put them at contender status, maybe better in regular season as Walton missed a 5th of the year with his ongoing foot issues, but probably have LA as the title favorite with Portland in a pretty decent sized group of contenders. Of course I had LA as the title favorite over Portland with Walton too.

Gilmore was in the league in 1977 and the Blazers even faced him in the playoffs

70sFan wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:Neck and neck with the Kings for the last playoff spot, probably losing

Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

wojoaderge wrote:

70sFan wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:Neck and neck with the Kings for the last playoff spot, probably losing

Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

Oh it's huge and it's certainly reason why my gut is to say that the Blazers would be considerably weaker despite Hawkins' offensive advantage.

But I'm glad you're focused on specific matchup. I think it's important to remember that Mo Lucas was the tough guy on those Blazers, no Walton. If you play Hawkins as a man defense center, you're totally screwed...but if you play Lucas at man, and let Hawkins roam, it might actually work pretty well.

In the end, the way that those Blazers crystalized into something that really seemed a tier above everyone else makes me think it's naive to think you could swap out Walton and do as well, but I actually think Hawkins is a reasonable guy to consider because he frankly had much more experience running a pivot offense than Walton did, and he didn't make use of one-handed pivot play like Hawkins did.

Doctor MJ wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

70sFan wrote:Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

Oh it's huge and it's certainly reason why my gut is to say that the Blazers would be considerably weaker despite Hawkins' offensive advantage.

But I'm glad you're focused on specific matchup. I think it's important to remember that Mo Lucas was the tough guy on those Blazers, no Walton. If you play Hawkins as a man defense center, you're totally screwed...but if you play Lucas at man, and let Hawkins roam, it might actually work pretty well.

In the end, the way that those Blazers crystalized into something that really seemed a tier above everyone else makes me think it's naive to think you could swap out Walton and do as well, but I actually think Hawkins is a reasonable guy to consider because he frankly had much more experience running a pivot offense than Walton did, and he didn't make use of one-handed pivot play like Hawkins did.

Well, Lucas may have been a tough guy, but I have doubts regarding his ability to stop a NBA WC starting-caliber center circa 1976-77 on a nightly basis. The Spirits didn't a have lot of success with him playing center, so I don't think he'd be better at it here. I think this Blazers team would have needed more dynamic scoring on the perimeter to help Hawk and Luke to make up the differential and they didn't have that.

I don't think you can take the Spirits sample for much. They didn't have much success with Moses Malone playing center either, had more with Mo if I remember right. They were . . . how to put this politely . . . the most insane group of individuals to ever pretend to be a team (excepting Don Adams).

penbeast0 wrote:Connie did play center for the 1st ABA champion though at the time we all felt he was truly a forward, and was well on his way again when he blew out his knee. He came back at about 80-90% and was 1st team All-NBA playing combo forward with Phoenix then blew out a knee again and declined fairly rapidly playing mainly a passing hub center style.

Offensively, his greater range and better outside passing (though not the interior passer that Walton was) and handling would give Jack Ramsey's teams probably better offense than with Walton. Centers couldn't guard him so they would probably use the center on Maurice Lucas who was a nice passing big man with a decent midrange himself. Defensively, they would be vulnerable to Kareem (Gilmore wasn't in the league yet and there were no other giants you had to worry about as the next best centers were guys like Cowens, Hayes, and Sikma) but otherwise should be fine although he wasn't the defender that Walton was.

I'd put them at contender status, maybe better in regular season as Walton missed a 5th of the year with his ongoing foot issues, but probably have LA as the title favorite with Portland in a pretty decent sized group of contenders. Of course I had LA as the title favorite over Portland with Walton too.

I think it's much more likely that Blazer squad shifts Maurice Lucas to C, play Hawkins at PF, keep Gross at SF (and obviously the backcourt the same).

It's a decent team: a frontcourt of Hawkins/Lucas/Gross is nothing to sneeze at. And their backcourt depth is perhaps under-appreciated. Add a smart coach to the mix, and it's hard to see them NOT being a playoff-level team in '77.

Hard to say if I think they're a contender; I voted yes, but now I'm second-guessing. I kinda feel either one of the Nuggets or the Lakers would be better in the West; so I'm feeling like their chances of making the Finals is small(ish). And they're a lesser team than the Sixers, too, so WINNING the title seems unlikely.

wojoaderge wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

Oh it's huge and it's certainly reason why my gut is to say that the Blazers would be considerably weaker despite Hawkins' offensive advantage.

But I'm glad you're focused on specific matchup. I think it's important to remember that Mo Lucas was the tough guy on those Blazers, no Walton. If you play Hawkins as a man defense center, you're totally screwed...but if you play Lucas at man, and let Hawkins roam, it might actually work pretty well.

In the end, the way that those Blazers crystalized into something that really seemed a tier above everyone else makes me think it's naive to think you could swap out Walton and do as well, but I actually think Hawkins is a reasonable guy to consider because he frankly had much more experience running a pivot offense than Walton did, and he didn't make use of one-handed pivot play like Hawkins did.

Well, Lucas may have been a tough guy, but I have doubts regarding his ability to stop a NBA WC starting-caliber center circa 1976-77 on a nightly basis. The Spirits didn't a have lot of success with him playing center, so I don't think he'd be better at it here. I think this Blazers team would have needed more dynamic scoring on the perimeter to help Hawk and Luke to make up the differential and they didn't have that.

I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Kareem would feast…but he feasted on Walton so that not different.

I would say that prime Hawkins would be by far the best offensive player on the court when playing any of those other guys you mention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nuggets have talent but I like Portland based on the matchups; Lakers are my favorites. Philly is a very tough matchup if they play as a team; Houston and Washington less talented and history tells us that Philadelphia pulled it together and made the finals.

The only centers in the league I worry about being too big for Lucas/Hawkins are Jabbar, Gilmore, and Lanier. And there are a lot of PFs that I don't think could handle Hawkins and other than maybe Cowens, I wouldn't guess any of the centers could handle him either.

Doctor MJ wrote:I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Where did I say that? I said their defense would be considerably poorer and they would need more perimeter scoring to make up for it>

Well, Hawkins would give you more perimeter scoring; especially in Portland where none of the other big minutes players really created offense for themselves. Walton gives you more post scoring though and it worked, they were #2 in the league in Ortg (and only #5 in Drtg despite a lot of guys with excellent defensive reps).

I think the other thing is that Portland overachieved their talent that year and I don't know if Hawkins can achieve that level of synergy even if his talent matched Walton's.

wojoaderge wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Where did I say that? I said their defense would be considerably poorer and they would need more perimeter scoring to make up for it>

My apologies for misinterpreting you.

I guess I'm confused by your use of the term "perimeter scoring". Certainly a worse defense means you need a better offense, but what do you mean by "perimeter scoring"? In going from Walton to Hawkins you're going from a guy who began his offensive possession establishing position and waiting for a pass, to a guy who was an exceptional dribbler and passer, and could also jump higher than you or palm the ball swooping to avoid the block.

Doctor MJ wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Where did I say that? I said their defense would be considerably poorer and they would need more perimeter scoring to make up for it>

My apologies for misinterpreting you.

I guess I'm confused by your use of the term "perimeter scoring". Certainly a worse defense means you need a better offense, but what do you mean by "perimeter scoring"? In going from Walton to Hawkins you're going from a guy who began his offensive possession establishing position and waiting for a pass, to a guy who was an exceptional dribbler and passer, and could also jump higher than you or palm the ball swooping to avoid the block.

I'm saying Gross, Hollins, Davis, Twardzik, etc. were not exceptional scorers. Maybe if this theoretical had a healthy and untraded Petrie, I might rate them higher.

wojoaderge wrote:

70sFan wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:Neck and neck with the Kings for the last playoff spot, probably losing

Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

Yeah, I think the defense would be a huge concern for them. Lucas was tough and scrappy, he could slow down some smaller centers but he wasn't a shotblocker and Portland team wasn't really big outside of him. With no rim protection, I don't see them competing for titles.

Still, I think no playoffs is a bit too harsh. They'd be excellent offensively.

Doctor MJ wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:
Oh it's huge and it's certainly reason why my gut is to say that the Blazers would be considerably weaker despite Hawkins' offensive advantage.

But I'm glad you're focused on specific matchup. I think it's important to remember that Mo Lucas was the tough guy on those Blazers, no Walton. If you play Hawkins as a man defense center, you're totally screwed...but if you play Lucas at man, and let Hawkins roam, it might actually work pretty well.

In the end, the way that those Blazers crystalized into something that really seemed a tier above everyone else makes me think it's naive to think you could swap out Walton and do as well, but I actually think Hawkins is a reasonable guy to consider because he frankly had much more experience running a pivot offense than Walton did, and he didn't make use of one-handed pivot play like Hawkins did.

Well, Lucas may have been a tough guy, but I have doubts regarding his ability to stop a NBA WC starting-caliber center circa 1976-77 on a nightly basis. The Spirits didn't a have lot of success with him playing center, so I don't think he'd be better at it here. I think this Blazers team would have needed more dynamic scoring on the perimeter to help Hawk and Luke to make up the differential and they didn't have that.

I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Kareem would feast…but he feasted on Walton so that not different.

I would say that prime Hawkins would be by far the best offensive player on the court when playing any of those other guys you mention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope you excluded Kareem from this group, as it's not clear for me you did.

With unfavorable matchup, you can see some of them having more offensive impact than Hawkins. I'm also not 100% sure that Hawkins was a better offensive player than Bob Lanier for example.

70sFan wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:Well, Lucas may have been a tough guy, but I have doubts regarding his ability to stop a NBA WC starting-caliber center circa 1976-77 on a nightly basis. The Spirits didn't a have lot of success with him playing center, so I don't think he'd be better at it here. I think this Blazers team would have needed more dynamic scoring on the perimeter to help Hawk and Luke to make up the differential and they didn't have that.

I would point out that at this point we know that the entire notion that you should be looking to volume score on the interior as a matter of course has been discredited.

Kareem would feast…but he feasted on Walton so that not different.

I would say that prime Hawkins would be by far the best offensive player on the court when playing any of those other guys you mention.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hope you excluded Kareem from this group, as it's not clear for me you did.

With unfavorable matchup, you can see some of them having more offensive impact than Hawkins. I'm also not 100% sure that Hawkins was a better offensive player than Bob Lanier for example.

That was certainly what I was trying to convey. Kareem is an Offensive GOAT candidate, the rest of those guys? Not even close.

And yeah I’d consider Hawkins considerably better at offense than Lanier. I think Hawkins has a case for being the best offensive player in the world at his peak.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

70sFan wrote:

wojoaderge wrote:

70sFan wrote:Wow, you aren't high on Hawkins are you?

On this team, no. The Elmore Smiths, Sam Laceys, and Tom Burlesons would be circling these games on their calendars, let alone the Kareems, Laniers, Gilmores, Issels, Adamses etc. And rim protection? Imo the defensive difference is significant.

Yeah, I think the defense would be a huge concern for them. Lucas was tough and scrappy, he could slow down some smaller centers but he wasn't a shotblocker and Portland team wasn't really big outside of him. With no rim protection, I don't see them competing for titles.

Still, I think no playoffs is a bit too harsh. They'd be excellent offensively.

Hawkins is a shot blocker. He’s too weak to be a big man defender, but he’s got big man length and perimeter agility. He can operate as a help rover.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk