RealGM

Who would you rather build a new team around in todays NBA?

Ewing for the D. Easier to offload scoring responsibility from him in this age. reggie was nothing remarkable on D, while Ewing anchored some ATG defenses.

EDIT: MLARP, stupid typo

tsherkin wrote:Ewing for the D. Easier to offload scoring responsibility from him in this age. reggie was nothing remarkable on D, while Ewing anchored some ATG offenses.

Do you mean defenses? I don't remember any of the 80's or 90's Knicks teams being considered great at scoring, above average at most.

Ewing gives you great defense, very capable offense though probably less central than in his own era. And, it's a lot tougher to find a great athletic big than a wing.

B-Mitch 30 wrote:

tsherkin wrote:Ewing for the D. Easier to offload scoring responsibility from him in this age. reggie was nothing remarkable on D, while Ewing anchored some ATG offenses.

Do you mean defenses? I don't remember any of the 80's or 90's Knicks teams being considered great at scoring, above average at most.

I did mean defenses, I have no idea why I wrote offenses.

Both very overrated, but I'll take Ewing.

penbeast0 wrote:Ewing gives you great defense, very capable offense though probably less central than in his own era. And, it's a lot tougher to find a great athletic big than a wing.

He was okay on offense. I think he was a little overrated because of the RS. He scored a bunch in the RS from 90-95, but was customarily a very notable playoff dropper. And he was absolutely horrible in the 94 Finals. He was a poor passer/playmaker, so his utility on offense was limited to his scoring prowess, particularly since he was mostly a non-elite offensive rebounder. Now, he often suffered with extremely low-quality offensive support, so that's something to consider, but he was also pretty turnover-prone with his poor footwork and was never known as an offensive prospect. He was "the next Bill Russell" who did a lot to get himself above and beyond what was expected of him.

I think he would have benefited greatly from reduced offensive responsibility, and that definitely would have happened had he played in this era, especially with his particular weaknesses on O. As you say, it's a lot tougher to find his sort of big than a wing or guard, and the number of true stand-out defensive anchor-level bigs in the league isn't that high at all, while the number of efficient perimeter scorers is.

The guy who led consistently great offenses in the Post-Season.

I see Miller as a better Devin Booker.