Comparing Front-courts

[hands11]

Rashard Lewis plays in the front court ?

[dangermouse]

dray on the pnr? how bout the pick and pop? hes got the range, with wall's/arenas' speed that would be a good play to fall back on.

[verbal8]

So-glad Bleacher Report did this article, I was going to create a thread comparing the Front-courts in the East so this-one is a good one to kick-off a discussion. Surprisingly, the Wizards Front-court was listed as the worst in the NBA. We're bad, but worst FC in the NBA?
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4333 ... top#page/2

If you include SF in the front-court I think the Wizards should be about right. Most teams have a proven star at SF or PF. Hopefully Blatche qualifies after this season, but before the season I get the argument he has only played at a high level for a few months.

I really don't see how the Cavs and Raptors could be ranked ahead of the Wizards.

[closg00]

So-glad Bleacher Report did this article, I was going to create a thread comparing the Front-courts in the East so this-one is a good one to kick-off a discussion. Surprisingly, the Wizards Front-court was listed as the worst in the NBA. We're bad, but worst FC in the NBA?
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/4333 ... top#page/2

If you include SF in the front-court I think the Wizards should be about right. Most teams have a proven star at SF or PF. Hopefully Blatche qualifies after this season, but before the season I get the argument he has only played at a high level for a few months.

I really don't see how the Cavs and Raptors could be ranked ahead of the Wizards.

Yeah, I thought the rankings were horrible (written by a Heat writer), but was good fodder for general discussion. Size matters in the playoffs. I suppose he included the SF's as a factor in the overall size of a team.

[closg00]

My rankings of the frontcourts in the Eastern Conference.

1. Boston Celtics
Starters: PF Kevin Garnett / CE Shaquille O'Neal
Bench: CE Jermaine O'Neal / PF Glen Davis / PF Luke Harangody / CE Semih Erden / CE Kendrick Perkins - INJ
Notes: With the roster a year older and Perkins out they'll probably go to a 4 man rotation with starters seeing limited minutes. A very deep frontline.

2. Orlando Magic
Starters: PF Rashard Lewis / CE Dwight Howard
Bench: CE Marcin Gortat / PF Brandon Bass / PF Ryan Anderson / CE Daniel Orton
Notes: With 'Shard a steady decline, Bass & Anderson could see bigger roles. But honestly, this ranking is all about Howard.

3. Chicago Bulls
Starters: PF Carlos Boozer / CE Joakim Noah
Bench: PF Taj Gibson / CE Kurt Thomas / CE Omer Asik
Notes: Asik is one to watch as a rookie (like him better than Seraphin). Bulls may have the best rebounding team in the league.

4. Atlanta Hawks
Starters: PF Josh Smith / CE Al Horford
Bench: CE Zaza Pachulia / PF Josh Powell / CE Jason Collins
Notes: Horford will move to PF when they acquire another C. They don't have one yet so until then...

5. Miami Heat
Starters: PF Chris Bosh / CE Joel Anthony
Bench: PF Udonis Haslem / CE Zydrunas Illgauskas / PF Juwan Howard / CE Jamaal Magloire
Notes: Joel Anthony is a better option a C than given credit for. He'll hustle & play solid D. Good depth off the bench.

6. Milwaukee Bucks
Starters: PF Drew Gooden / CE Andrew Bogut
Bench: PF Ersan Ilyasova / PF Jon Brockman / CE Larry Sanders
Notes: A little thin upfront in terms of depth. Brockman was a good pickup on the cheap. Another solid rebounding team.

7. New Jersey Nets
Starters: PF Troy Murphy / CE Brook Lopez
Bench: PF Derrick Favors / CE Johan Petro / PF Kris Humphries / PF Sean May / CE Brian Zoubek
Notes: Nice starting duo with plenty of rebounding & scoring. Defense will be a big issue however. How quick with Favors develop?

8. New York Knicks
Starters: PF Anthony Randolph / CE Amar'e Stoudemire
Bench: CE Ronny Turiaf / CE Timofey Mozgov / CE Jerome Jordan / CE Eddy Curry
Notes: No depth. Not much defense but they should be entertaining. I expect a breakout yr from Randolph.

9. Charlotte Bobcats
Starters: PF Boris Diaw / CE Erick Dampier
Bench: PF Tyrus Thomas / CE Nazr Mohammed / CE DeSagana Diop / PF Eduardo Najera
Notes: Just the opposite of NY. Frontcourt has limitations offensively but plenty of length, defense and plenty of depth. If Thomas breaks out or Diaw finds his game they could be rated a bit higher.

10. Washington Wizards
Starters: PF Andray Blatche / CE Javale McGee
Bench: PF Yi Jianlian / CE Hilton Armstrong / PF Trevor Booker / CE Kevin Seraphin
Notes: Only NY can compete athletically upfront. Lack of depth & defense will be major concerns.

11. Philadelphia 76ers
Starters: PF Elton Brand / CE Spencer Hawes
Bench: PF Marreese Speights / CE Tony Battie / CE Jason Smith
Notes: A bad mix IMO. Brand has lost two steps. Hawes is incredibly soft. They really need a breakout from Speights. If they eventually decide to bench Brand & go small with Thad Young at the 4, I'd probably rate them a bit higher.

12. Toronto Raptors
Starters: PF Amir Johnson / CE Andrea Bargnani
Bench: PF Ed Davis / CE David Andersen / PF Reggie Evans / PF Joey Dorsey / CE Solomon Alabi
Notes: Bargs may have plenty of scoring opps this year but defensively it going to be a long year for him. Amir racks up fouls at an incredible rate. I suspect Davis might take Johnson's job before long.

13. Indiana Pacers
Starters: PF Jeff Foster / CE Roy Hibbert
Bench: PF Tyler Hansbrough / CE Solomon Jones / PF Josh McRoberts
Note: The recent Collison trade means they have a gaping hole at PF. They'll have to acquire another big before the season starts.

14. Detroit Pistons
Starters: PF Jonas Jerebko / CE Ben Wallace
Bench: PF Charlie Villanueva / CE Greg Monroe / PF Jason Maxiell / PF Chris Wilcox
Notes: Only real hope is that Monroe develops. It's going to be a very long yr in Detroit.

15. Cleveland Cavaliers
Starters: PF J.J. Hickson / CE Anderson Varejao
Bench: PF Leon Powe / CE Ryan Hollins
Notes: Jamison likely slides over to the 3 so they'll have scoring in the starting lineup. Varejao is solid & Hickson may develop some but the cupboard is pretty bare here.

Overall I have the Wizards 23rd in the league in terms of their frontcourt. Also ahead of Western Conference teams Minnesota & Phoenix.

Like your rankings, the Cavs did sign Samardo Samuels so that will give them some added depth.

[WizarDynasty]

Small forward is a front court position so to create rankings that don't include small forward shows a extreme lack of insight into fundamentals of the small forward position. A small forward has features of both a shooting guard and powerforward forward. Small foward is the most versatile player on the court..he has front court and backcourt skills (on both offense and defense). shooting guards normally don't have front court skills on defense while small forwards. If you need to a definition of front court skills that shooting guards normally don't have i will explain.
What makes small forwards valuable is that they can defend in the front court and in the backcourt if you have a true small forward.
our small forward--Booker and Thornton--don't have shooting guard handles and agility when they dribble to basket. Thornton and booker do have powerfoward skills. Time will tell.
Howard has the backcourt shooting guards skills, put doesn't have the strength to guard powerforwards on switches in the post which is why he isn't a true small forward.
A small foward is an in between position. small foward is hybrid of shooting guard and powerfoward. If your small foward doesn't have blend of both a shooting guard and a powerforward, then he isn't really a small forward. I hope Booker demonstrates elite dribbling skills, body control, and shooting ability of a shooting guard since he has shown that he has powerfoward skills.
thornton has powerforward skills...shaky shooting, poor dribbling and body control. So he is bad small foward. he has shown decent post defense but nothing highlight worthy.
So again, we have poor small forwards on this team and haven't a good small forward in decades.
Butler has the strengths of a shooting guard offensively, but didn't have any traits of a powerforward defensively and he was still slow.
So Howard with his elite ball handling and shooting of a shooting guard, combined with his rebounding and shot blocking--is the closest thing we have to a sg slash powerforward. his shotblocking is front court skill while his shooting, ball handling, and in the air body control are all shooting guard attributes. a guy like kevin Durant..extremely long but has excellent handlles, shooting, shot blocking, and rebounding....has traits of both a shooting guard and powerforward. scottie pippen would be another example. jared would have been good because he had the ball handling--but didn't have the shooting or body control..he also had the rebounding and shotblocking of a powerfoward. I still can't believe Wizards drafted juan dixon over Tayshaun prince..---A true above average small foward comes around very rarely. So again, small forward is the multi-talented player on the court offensively and defensively--both a front and backcourt player---(if he is good).

[keynote]

I agree with the article that, traditionally, SF is included in the front court (since the front court is defined as Fs and Cs).

Now, as of late, many people use the term "bigs" to describe PFs and Cs, as opposed to "guards" (PGs/SGs) and "swingmen" (SGs/SFs). Many SFs in the modern NBA have "swingmen" capabilities, which is way many of you find it odd to include them in the "front court." But it's not uncommon for a team to play a non-swingman at SF - our very own Juwan Howard, Jamison, and Jeffries, for example. Xavier McDaniel and Corliss Williamson come to mind as well. Adrian Dantley scored most of his points in the post. Etc. And, of course, one of the best SFs of all time - Larry Bird - wasn't a classic swingman. He certainly didn't rebound like one. Bird was more of a stretch 4 than anything else.

Hence the definition. To me, "frontcourt" doesn't mean "bigs"; it means "Fs and Cs."

[verbal8]

And, of course, one of the best SFs of all time - Larry Bird - wasn't a classic swingman. He certainly didn't rebound like one. Bird was more of a stretch 4 than anything else.

In today's NBA Bird would be a stretch 4. However he played a lot of his minutes with Parish and McHale, so he would have be the Small Forward by default.

[Dat2U]

I agree with the article that, traditionally, SF is included in the front court (since the front court is defined as Fs and Cs).

Now, as of late, many people use the term "bigs" to describe PFs and Cs, as opposed to "guards" (PGs/SGs) and "swingmen" (SGs/SFs). Many SFs in the modern NBA have "swingmen" capabilities, which is way many of you find it odd to include them in the "front court." But it's not uncommon for a team to play a non-swingman at SF - our very own Juwan Howard, Jamison, and Jeffries, for example. Xavier McDaniel and Corliss Williamson come to mind as well. Adrian Dantley scored most of his points in the post. Etc. And, of course, one of the best SFs of all time - Larry Bird - wasn't a classic swingman. He certainly didn't rebound like one. Bird was more of a stretch 4 than anything else.

Hence the definition. To me, "frontcourt" doesn't mean "bigs"; it means "Fs and Cs."

Howard has played PF ever since Webber left. Jamison has played PF for the last 6 years. Who cares were Jeffries plays, he's just awful. If you have to go back to the X-Man, Corliss, Bird or Dantley then maybe what happened 20 years ago doesn't necessarily work today.

Sure 15-20 years ago, seeing power players at SF was the norm. I remember when Charles Smith & Anthony Mason would basically manhandle 3s years ago for the Knicks.

Today, I don't know if the same definition applies. It's a more finesse game now. Skill is at a premium. Even Gerald Wallace & Shawn Marion have some perimeter skill to complement their ability to defend & rebound in the post.

We could get into the semantics of what frontcourt actually means but to me isolating bigs from middles or smalls helps provide some clarity as to what each of the teams strengths & weaknesses are. When evaluating what OKC's ability to defend the post, does it really make a ton of sense to include a pure wing player in Durant?

[nate33]

Agree with Dat2U. Today's NBA is geared more toward quickness and skill, not height and length. SF's used to be quicker PF's with a better jumper. Now, SF's are basically tall SG's. They're "swingmen" not "frontcourt".

[keynote]

We could get into the semantics of what frontcourt actually means but to me isolating bigs from middles or smalls helps provide some clarity as to what each of the teams strengths & weaknesses are. When evaluating what OKC's ability to defend the post, does it really make a ton of sense to include a pure wing player in Durant?

I agree, for the most part. The SF position seems more perimeter-oriented now than it did 10-15 years ago. Players like Marion, Odom, and Josh Smith (and, earlier this decade, SA Rahim, Horry and the aforementioned Jamison) have transitioned from being big SFs to becoming mobile PFs - especially as they get older and slower. Jeff Green would've been a pure SF (an offensively-limited SF, but a pure SF nonetheless) ten years ago; now, he's a PF. Those big SFs have been replaced by slashers and 3-point shooting defensive specialists (e.g., Ariza, etc.).

Even so, SFs are still expected to carry more of the rebounding responsibilities for the team than SGs. And, while most SFs aren't expected to defend the post, many are expected to rotate and provide help-side D in ways that SGs and PGs are not. Durant, LeBron, etc., are not primarily used as low-post defenders, but their length and athleticism can certainly bother penetrators if the primary low-post defender is caught out of position.

So, when evaluating a team's front court, it might make sense to give extra "front court" credit to SFs who truly contribute to a team's front court responsibilities, ignore those who don't. When assessing DAL's front court, leave undersized Butler out of it. But when evaluating PHX, it makes sense to at least mention 6'10" Turkoglu as part of the rotation - at least in passing.

[pancakes3]

no doubt a sf CAN be part of the front court but like you said in today's game, it's not necessary. not even the big ones like artest really are. even the ones that chip in like marion, lebron (works the boards) are nowhere close to being as impactful as a journeyman PF or C. their contributions are marginal. however, that list treats overall talent as somehow relevant like granger's game has any impact on the pacer's FC.

i won't have a problem if a SF with FC impact gets extra credit points but it's not a part of the FC by default by any means, imo.

[doclinkin]

Eh, there's no consequential definition of this tweener position.

The real definition of a Small forward is: not big enough to hang fulltime in the front court, not quick enough to slash with the guards; too talented to sit on the bench.

The rest depends on their role within a scheme. Some teams rightly call their SF a frontcourt position. Other's no. For this assessment I'd define it defensively: does this player routinely defend players inside the paint, is it a responsibility to defend the paint and rebound inside the box? If so they are a frontcourt player, if not they're a swingman. Not every team actually has a 'frontcourt' small forward.

[WizarDynasty]

small forward is a hybrid powerforward/shooting guard on both offense and defense if he's good. if he's not good, then he's an incomplete player. See scottie pippen and Tayshaun prince. That's the best description.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Jamison would have been a better SF for the Wizards last season prior to the trade.

[WizarDynasty]

if jamison had the ability to guard shooting guards part time then i would agree with you. Tayshaun Prince can guard sg or p/f occassionally so its easy to see why Tayshaun is a true s/f.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Jamison can't guard SFs well. However, he kills them on boards and he posts them up at will.

If I could coach an idea I would have explored for the Wizards last season is Jamison at SF, Oberto at PF, Haywood at C. Oberto was a very crafty defender. His lack of rebounds and scoring could have been mitigated somewhat by having Jamison shooting all the time at SF, while being a dominate rebounder at SF.

Wiz could have probably been even better with Jamison, Blatche, Haywood.

[barelyawake]

I love how this thread has degenerated into a discussion about small forward. It demonstrates the cognitive block between reality and what this board has once again degenerated into. The author is right. We have no leadership and no stars (thus no star calls) in our frontcourt. Those are the problems. Clearly stated. Those will continue to be major problems. We will not develop out of it with the current crop of players.

Perhaps instead of chiding the article, we should wake-up to the reality of the situation that the rest of the league has identified as our weakness. The rest of the league ranks us as having the worst front court in the NBA. Perhaps that will quell some of the talk about "potential" -- though I doubt it.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

I love how this thread has degenerated into a discussion about small forward. It demonstrates the cognitive block between reality and what this board has once again degenerated into. The author is right. We have no leadership and no stars (thus no star calls) in our frontcourt. Those are the problems. Clearly stated. Those will continue to be major problems. We will not develop out of it with the current crop of players.

Perhaps instead of chiding the article, we should wake-up to the reality of the situation that the rest of the league has identified as our weakness. The rest of the league ranks us as having the worst front court in the NBA. Perhaps that will quell some of the talk about "potential" -- though I doubt it.

Okay, ba, the Wizards frontcourt sucks. Can I call you Ji, now?

Seriously, I don't doubt the Wizards have serious weakness up front. Unknowns with little to no experience have to come through and Andray Blatche has to not only prove it was no fluke, but he's got to lead wisely and peacefully coexist with Flip Saunders all season.

For one, I'll stick to waxing on rather optimistically about "potential". I am fully aware that my 49-win prediction could be 15 wins too many.

[Dat2U]

Yeah BA, your saying nothing new. I think most everyone agrees that we need a defensive anchor in the post. No one ever said this roster was a finished product. No one is saying were going to win a championship in the next year or two. As optimistic as I am I still have us hovering around .500 next season our front line solidly in the bottom third of the league so I think I'm well aware of "reality".