RealGM

What could this historical Big 3 (+ a few others) do in today's playoffs?

F Dominique Wilkins (prime)
F Yi
C Mel Daniels (prime)
G "Sugar Ray" Richardson (prime and, for this scenario, drug-free)
G Martell Webster
6 Boris Diaw
Head coach: Billy Cunningham

Could they, for example, compete with the Lakers, Magic, or Spurs?

ya

No, Yi and Webster aren't ready for prime time; the three stars are good enough to be the core of a championship team but they need solid roleplayers around them. They don't have them here.

Even if you just look at those three, would they be the best big three in the playoffs? Daniels isn't as good as Duncan or Garnett, probably not as good as Amare or Dirk, but is probably better though not as versatile as Rasheed . . .more like a superior version of current Shaq of Chandler with low post moves. Wilkens isn't as good as LeBron or Kobe, probably not as good as Ginobili or Pierce though more likely to take over the game due to his bigger role with those teammates, but easily the equal or superior of Hamilton, Howard, Grant Hill, etc. Richardson was always a bit out of control, not the guy you wanted making decisions with the game on the line but great phsyical skills. Again, I'd rather have Nash, Paul, or Billups but would say he is roughly equivalent in his drug free prime (if there was one) to the current version of Jason Kidd, Tony Parker, etc.

This big three has good size and physicality, great inside scoring but weak outside shooting (need some shooters, which Diaw doesn't help) and not the most cerebral of cores. Would need some shooters and facilitators who move the ball around and are willing to sacrifice their numbers plus a good coach to get them to play together. I'd put them in the mix with the other prime big threes but they would need to put a team around them, not just Yi, Martell, and Diaw.

penbeast0 wrote:No, Yi and Webster aren't ready for prime time; the three stars are good enough to be the core of a championship team but they need solid roleplayers around them. They don't have them here.

Even if you just look at those three, would they be the best big three in the playoffs? Daniels isn't as good as Duncan or Garnett, probably not as good as Amare or Dirk, but is probably better though not as versatile as Rasheed . . .more like a superior version of current Shaq of Chandler with low post moves. Wilkens isn't as good as LeBron or Kobe, probably not as good as Ginobili or Pierce though more likely to take over the game due to his bigger role with those teammates, but easily the equal or superior of Hamilton, Howard, Grant Hill, etc. Richardson was always a bit out of control, not the guy you wanted making decisions with the game on the line but great phsyical skills. Again, I'd rather have Nash, Paul, or Billups but would say he is roughly equivalent in his drug free prime (if there was one) to the current version of Jason Kidd, Tony Parker, etc.

This big three has good size and physicality, great inside scoring but weak outside shooting (need some shooters, which Diaw doesn't help) and not the most cerebral of cores. Would need some shooters and facilitators who move the ball around and are willing to sacrifice their numbers plus a good coach to get them to play together. I'd put them in the mix with the other prime big threes but they would need to put a team around them, not just Yi, Martell, and Diaw.

I always enjoy reading your analytical posts! Thanks for a great response ... but I don't think I'm ready to say that Ginobili is better than 'Nique. And how would Cunningham's coaching compare with Phil Jackson's or SVG's in your opinion?

cjx wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



I always enjoy reading your analytical posts! Thanks for a great response ... but I don't think I'm ready to say that Ginobili is better than 'Nique. And how would Cunningham's coaching compare with Phil Jackson's or SVG's in your opinion?

Im not a fan of Cunninghams system. Its the same offense that Hannum used but any coach who limits/handcuffs his best player and wants his SF to be the setup guy is IMHO missing the boat. Nique needs to finish not setup. Cunningham wants Pippen as his SF not Nique who is the opposite.

You know the saying that Dean Smith is the only guy who can keep MJ under 20ppg? Cunningham is the only guy who could do the same to DrJ. Nique would be dreadfull in Cunninghams system.

Not a great fan of Cunningham either. But in answer to a comparisom of Ginobili v. Nique; they had different strengths. Nique was a pure isolation scorer, great one on one player, super athlete, but scoring was pretty much it and he wasn't that efficient at it either. Maybe he could change his game to fit into a system, maybe he would just decline into irrelevancy like Glen Robinson, it's far from certain. However, he was a very poor defender, not great at moving the ball and rewarding his teammates for getting open, an average to above average defender, though he was a very classy person who stayed loyal to his franchise. Compared to Nique, Ginobili brings superior efficiency, defense, passing, and versatility with a much better outside shot as well. He isn't a guy who could score like Nique against two and three defenders but he's a guy who, on a championship contender with other threats, has shown he fits in very well. Nique on the Spurs or most other contenders (who already have primary options/go to guys) would have to adapt in ways he never showed during his career. He probably wouldn't which means that you would have to adapt the team around him which would hurt the Spurs in terms of offensive efficiency (taking the ball out of the hands of Tim Duncan or Tony Parker), ball movement (adding to the first point), defense, and team unity. I'd go with Ginobili unless you have a team with no go to guy on it.