Whats more important to build a Championship team

[G35]

You need both. I don't think one can win without the other.

Jordan - everyone says Jordan won without a great big man. But the Bulls weren't going anywhere with Oakley as their best big man. He was traded for Bill Cartwright a journeyman type C but he gave the Bulls just what was missing. Luc Longley another player that is journeyman status but he filled the role of shot blocker and making that lil 10-15 ft jumper

Duncan - everyone bitches about him being a C. But Popovich knew that saving Duncan from the banging vs bigger players would lengthen Duncan's career. So they put Nazr and Rasho around him. The Spurs have been looking for that C to put next Duncan since 07. I would also say that without Ginobli's presence the Spurs offense is that much more predictable and they don't win 4 championships.

Kobe - everyone says the Lakers real advantage is their length in the middle (pause)

Wade/Lebron - They actually did have a decent defensive presence in Joel Anthony; it's just Joel was complete utter crap on offense. He can barely be trusted to finish a dunk.

Dirk - as we all saw the difference of having a shot blocker/finisher like Chandler made all the difference

Nash - people get mad when I say I would take Amare over Nash to START a team. Nash had Dirk/Finley and all in their primes and couldn't get it done for 5 years. Then he had the perfect offensive team built around him. But everyone says that he needed a defensive/rebounding presence.

Celtics 08- present - team was chock full of all star players but why did they lose to the Lakers in 2010? Oh Kendrick Perkins was hurt. Why did the Celtics falter this year? Kendrick Perkins was traded.

David Robinson - one of the best anchors/scoring centers the league has ever seen but he never had that dynamic creating wing player. If he would have had Ginobli type player he would have made it to the finals without Duncan.

Shaq - who has always had a dynamic wing player except for his rookie season and he didn't turn the Magic around with just his presence. But he wasn't able to win with Penny. He couldn't win with an Eddie Jones/Van Exel backcourt. Shaq will make you an instant contender, Wade and Kobe put rings on his finger.....

[mysticbb]

Jordan - everyone says Jordan won without a great big man. But the Bulls weren't going anywhere with Oakley as their best big man. He was traded for Bill Cartwright a journeyman type C but he gave the Bulls just what was missing.

Chicago Bulls 1988 (with Charles Oakley): 105.5 DRtg, 5th best defense in the league, +3.8 SRS
Chicago Bulls 1989 (with Bill Cartwright): 107.7 DRtg, 11th in the league, +2.2 SRS, Cartwright missed 4 games, the Bulls had 104.5 DRtg in those 4 games against teams with an average ORtg of 107.3.

Well, looks like it all started with Bill Cartwright.

Nash - people get mad when I say I would take Amare over Nash to START a team.

Because Amar'e Stoudemire is a defensive anchor? DO you know that the Knicks with Stoudemire on the court had a 112.9 DRtg? That is 2.9 points worse than any team had with Nash on the court. There isn't even one example in which a team with Nash on the court was worse defensively than the Knicks with Stoudemire. And you want to take Stoudemire based upon defense? Really?

Celtics 08- present - team was chock full of all star players but why did they lose to the Lakers in 2010? Oh Kendrick Perkins was hurt. Why did the Celtics falter this year? Kendrick Perkins was traded.

After the trade the Celtis didn't suffer defensively, they had in fact the same defensive rating in the games after the trade as they had before (91.1 PPG, 100.3 DRtg), they suffered offensively. Maybe Perkins was an underrated offensive player? Or it might be more reasonable that the Celtics had to replace their starting center due to injuries?

Shaq - who has always had a dynamic wing player except for his rookie season and he didn't turn the Magic around with just his presence. But he wasn't able to win with Penny. He couldn't win with an Eddie Jones/Van Exel backcourt. Shaq will make you an instant contender, Wade and Kobe put rings on his finger.....

Lakers from 1999 to 2004 were 23-26 without O'Neal, but Bryant playing. The Lakers with O'Neal and without Bryant were 30-10. Yeah, looks like it was Bryant who was more important than O'Neal to those Lakers.

[34Dayz]

lol @ saying Bryant put "rings" on Shaqs fingers, certainly not in 00 he didn't.

Shaq and Hakeem both did it without a second star in 94 and 00.

lol @ overrating Hardaway, Penny was a decent SG but he isn't even on Drexlers Tier who outplayed Penny thoroughly in the 95 Finals, let alone Kobe or Wade's.

Penny had 2 good seasons next to Shaq and then a bunch of terrible ones after Oneal jumped to LA.

[JordansBulls]

Anyone can score. Few can anchor. Gotta go with with D.

What if your anchor is Mutombo and your 1st option?

[Darain]

I'm surprised it's tied, I thought more people would go for the 1st option because of the Dirk vs Garnett situation

[G35]

Anyone can block shots. Look at Joel Anthony.

And not just anybody can score. Why couldn't Lebron score against the Dallas zone in the 4th? What people mean is anyone can score if left unguarded. It takes someone special to be able to score when an entire defense is thrown at you.

lol @ saying Bryant put "rings" on Shaqs fingers, certainly not in 00 he didn't.

Shaq and Hakeem both did it without a second star in 94 and 00.

lol @ overrating Hardaway, Penny was a decent SG but he isn't even on Drexlers Tier who outplayed Penny thoroughly in the 95 Finals, let alone Kobe or Wade's.

Penny had 2 good seasons next to Shaq and then a bunch of terrible ones after Oneal jumped to LA.

Hmmmm well Kobe was certainly an "All Star" that season. Hakeem (and Duncan) have done it without all stars. Not Shaq. Anfernee was 1st team all NBA in 95. Just because Clyde may have outplayed him doesn't make him any less a player. Hakeem outplayed Shaq does that make him any less a player? I can't wait to hear how you spin that.

Jordan - everyone says Jordan won without a great big man. But the Bulls weren't going anywhere with Oakley as their best big man. He was traded for Bill Cartwright a journeyman type C but he gave the Bulls just what was missing.

Chicago Bulls 1988 (with Charles Oakley): 105.5 DRtg, 5th best defense in the league, +3.8 SRS
Chicago Bulls 1989 (with Bill Cartwright): 107.7 DRtg, 11th in the league, +2.2 SRS, Cartwright missed 4 games, the Bulls had 104.5 DRtg in those 4 games against teams with an average ORtg of 107.3.

Well, looks like it all started with Bill Cartwright.

Nash - people get mad when I say I would take Amare over Nash to START a team.

Because Amar'e Stoudemire is a defensive anchor? DO you know that the Knicks with Stoudemire on the court had a 112.9 DRtg? That is 2.9 points worse than any team had with Nash on the court. There isn't even one example in which a team with Nash on the court was worse defensively than the Knicks with Stoudemire. And you want to take Stoudemire based upon defense? Really?

Celtics 08- present - team was chock full of all star players but why did they lose to the Lakers in 2010? Oh Kendrick Perkins was hurt. Why did the Celtics falter this year? Kendrick Perkins was traded.

After the trade the Celtis didn't suffer defensively, they had in fact the same defensive rating in the games after the trade as they had before (91.1 PPG, 100.3 DRtg), they suffered offensively. Maybe Perkins was an underrated offensive player? Or it might be more reasonable that the Celtics had to replace their starting center due to injuries?

Shaq - who has always had a dynamic wing player except for his rookie season and he didn't turn the Magic around with just his presence. But he wasn't able to win with Penny. He couldn't win with an Eddie Jones/Van Exel backcourt. Shaq will make you an instant contender, Wade and Kobe put rings on his finger.....

Lakers from 1999 to 2004 were 23-26 without O'Neal, but Bryant playing. The Lakers with O'Neal and without Bryant were 30-10. Yeah, looks like it was Bryant who was more important than O'Neal to those Lakers.

You can say anything you want about your stats but having Cartwright in the middle benefited the Bulls more than having Oakley. Another case where you can't analyze a situation without stats. Really what do those rankings mean? Are they indicative of how a team is going to perform in the playoff's or do you just post them as a point of reference. Because Dallas was 8th this year Drtg. What did that mean for their performance?

Look at the Chicago Bulls who were rated #1 in Drtg. Carlos Boozer missed 23 games and they still managed to be ranked #1. So of course they must not need him and a lot of fans are going to say "Hell yeah! Boozer sucks you idiot!" But then Noah missed 34 games and they still ranked #1, so Noah didn't have an effect either? Well Keith Bogans played all 82 games and Bulls fans are still looking for a better SG......

[mysticbb]

You can say anything you want about your stats but having Cartwright in the middle benefited the Bulls more than having Oakley.

The Bulls didn't become better defensively with Cartwright, no matter how you want to spin it, the Bulls just didn't start winning, because Cartwright made a difference to their defense. That is bs. The Bulls started winning when they became awesome offensively, when Pippen and Grant started to convert their open opportunities and Jordan finally got some help offensively. That's when they started winning. During the first 3-peat the Bulls were as good defensively than in 1988 with Oakley,and that is also true for the playoffs. The difference was offense here.

Really what do those rankings mean? Are they indicative of how a team is going to perform in the playoff's or do you just post them as a point of reference.

They are indeed useful in terms of prediction the outcome of the playoffs. If we add the homecourt advantage we can make a pretty good prediction.

Because Dallas was 8th this year Drtg. What did that mean for their performance?

Yeah, what did that mean? The Mavericks didn't won in the playoffs due to their phenomenal defense, they actually won, because they played better offensively than their opponents.

Look at the Chicago Bulls who were rated #1 in Drtg. Carlos Boozer missed 23 games and they still managed to be ranked #1. So of course they must not need him and a lot of fans are going to say "Hell yeah! Boozer sucks you idiot!" But then Noah missed 34 games and they still ranked #1, so Noah didn't have an effect either? Well Keith Bogans played all 82 games and Bulls fans are still looking for a better SG......

Yeah, Boozer sucks on defense, the Bulls were really worse with him on the court. And the interesting thing is that the Bulls indeed played better defensively without Noah on the court. Why? Well, first of all people tend to overrate hustle players on defense. Somehow a player who fights for every ball is seen as a great defender, but defense has also a lot to do with fundamentals, the correct use of the body in the post is one area in which Noah isn't good. And as a defensive man in the middle, he has to defend the post. Naoh isn't good as post defender, he is good as defending face-up isos, but he is far more used against post-ups. The Bulls have a better post-up defender in Kurt Thomas. Thus Noah's minutes were replaced by a pretty good defensive player. Obviously overall Noah is better due to better offense.
The Bulls are asking for a better SG, because Bogans is bad offensively. Right now they can't put a 2nd ball handler on the court next to Rose, that is an issue, especially when Rose has to bring the ball down the court, put energy into the point guard tasks, but also be ready to be the first option scorer. That demanded a lot of energy. Getting a better ball handling guard will give Rose more time to use his game off the ball more, which will also be positive in terms of saving energy.

[Lakers05]

With how easy it is to score these days, it's easily defensive anchor. However, everything is relative, and since it's so easy to score, defensive anchors don't have the same impact as before(see how most of Dwight's "contests" didn't really matter against the Hawks), so you would need to have a very big advantage, close to Wilt-like possibly, to truly be a defensive anchor.

Given that we didn't even have one 7-footer in this year's lottery, much less one that can jump, where are we going to find these?

[34Dayz]

Hmmmm well Kobe was certainly an "All Star" that season. Hakeem (and Duncan) have done it without all stars. Not Shaq. Anfernee was 1st team all NBA in 95. Just because Clyde may have outplayed him doesn't make him any less a player. Hakeem outplayed Shaq does that make him any less a player? I can't wait to hear how you spin that.

Kobe was barely coming into his own in 00, he wasn't a Star yet, so yes Shaqs 00 was the same as Duncans 03 or Hakeem 94.

Penny was "one of the better guards" in the leauge for 1-2 seasons when he was playing next to Shaq who opens up the court for wing players due to his low post dominance and enhances their game. Its much easier for a Wing player to grow and develop his game playing with Shaq thats why players like Kobe and Wade grew into amazing players as soon as they were paired with him.

There was a number of guards in the league on Pennys level of better then him so acting like Shaq had something special when many other teams had the same thing is silly. Shaq had a "good guard" so did many of the other teams.

#1, Drexler outplayed or at worst cancelled out Penny in the 95 Finals.

#2. This is 3rd year Shaq vs Prime experienced Hakeem and they basically played to a wash.
Imagine if this was 3rd year Hakeem vs 00Shaq... it would be murder.

#3. outside of penny/drexler who basically canceled eachother out although I think Drexler had the better series the rockets had a better more well rounded supporting cast who actually stepped up and played well while the rest of the Orlando cast shrunk and chocked.

Let's look at the numbers here (94-95 NBA Finals):

Shaq (3rd year): 45mpg, 28.0ppg, 59.5 FG%, 12.5rpg, 6apg, 2.5bpg, 2.5spg
Olajuwon (Prime): 44.8mpg, 32.8ppg, 48.3 FG%, 11.5rpg, 5.5apg, 2.0bpg, 2.0spg

Shaq averaged more rebounds, blocks, assists and steals in the series.

Magic got owned by Rockets, not Shaq

[ThaRegul8r]

Kobe was barely coming into his own in 00, he wasn't a Star yet, so yes Shaqs 00 was the same as Duncans 03 or Hakeem 94.

I wasn't aware that Duncan in 2003 or Hakeem in 1994 had an All-NBA/First Team All-Defense teammate in those particular years as Shaq did in 2000. Guess you learn something new every day.

You know, I find it fascinating how posters' statements widely diverge on the Shaq/Kobe duo depending on the agenda.

[J~Rush]

Anyone can score. Few can anchor. Gotta go with with D.

What if your anchor is Mutombo and your 1st option?

If your 1st option is Mutombo you need to be fired as a head coach.

[34Dayz]

Kobe was barely coming into his own in 00, he wasn't a Star yet, so yes Shaqs 00 was the same as Duncans 03 or Hakeem 94.

I wasn't aware that Duncan in 2003 or Hakeem in 1994 had an All-NBA/First Team All-Defense teammate in those particular years as Shaq did in 2000. Guess you learn something new every day.

You know, I find it fascinating how posters' statements widely diverge on the Shaq/Kobe duo depending on the agenda.

Defense from the Guard spots has the least overall impact especially from someone like Kobe who was a great M2M defender but never excelled at help D or team D.

Kobe was an "Elite Roleplayer" in 00 just like Tony Parker was when he was averaging 16/6Ast for the Spurs in 03 not to mention they also had a very good Wing-Defender in rookie Ginobili. Shaq was miles ahead of the 2nd best player in the league in 00 and that player wasn't Kobe, that was Shaqs Title just like 03 was Duncans and 94 is Hakeems, if you wanna split hairs and say oh this player did more then another thats a waste of time.

[gswhoops]

Way too vague of a question.

Are we talking a first option like LeBron, or a first option like Mike Beasley?

Are we talking a defensive anchor like Bogut, or like Kendrick Perkins?

[therealbig3]

Kobe was barely coming into his own in 00, he wasn't a Star yet, so yes Shaqs 00 was the same as Duncans 03 or Hakeem 94.

I wasn't aware that Duncan in 2003 or Hakeem in 1994 had an All-NBA/First Team All-Defense teammate in those particular years as Shaq did in 2000. Guess you learn something new every day.

You know, I find it fascinating how posters' statements widely diverge on the Shaq/Kobe duo depending on the agenda.

Defense from the Guard spots has the least overall impact especially from someone like Kobe who was a great M2M defender but never excelled at help D or team D.

Kobe was an "Elite Roleplayer" in 00 just like Tony Parker was when he was averaging 16/6Ast for the Spurs in 03 not to mention they also had a very good Wing-Defender in rookie Ginobili. Shaq was miles ahead of the 2nd best player in the league in 00 and that player wasn't Kobe, that was Shaqs Title just like 03 was Duncans and 94 is Hakeems, if you wanna split hairs and say oh this player did more then another thats a waste of time.

Kobe was injured that playoff run, so his personal statistics don't really do justice to how good he actually was, but Kobe's man defense was important, and he carried the Lakers to crucial playoff wins in that run that Parker and Ginobili just didn't do in 03.

First of all, Kobe played a great series against Sacramento that year. He was clearly #2 to Shaq, but Kobe played better than Parker or Ginobili did in any series in 03. Kobe put up 3 straight 30+ point games in that series.

Against Phoenix, Kobe played very well in Game 1, hit the game winner over Kidd in Game 2, and played well in Games 3 and 4. His only real down game was Game 5, which was a blowout win anyway.

Then there's the Portland series. Kobe pretty much matches Shaq's production in a 2 point Game 3 win, plays great in a loss in Game 6 in which Shaq shot poorly, and then leads them in that Game 7 comeback in which he again plays great.

His stats are skewed in the Finals due to only playing 9 minutes in Game 2, and he was struggling with his shooting anyway, but he carried them to a 2 point win in OT with Shaq fouled out in Game 4. Yeah Shaq had a monster game too, but in crunchtime, Kobe carried them, which is important.

You comparing Kobe's role in 2000 to Parker's role in 2003 is just laughable, they're not comparable at all. Kobe played a much bigger role, and was entrusted to close out games. Parker in 2003 had a small role, and was only good for a game here or there where he shot well and scored well. The Spurs went to Duncan to close out games.

And, Shaq had Rice, Harper, Horry, Fisher, and Fox on his team in addition to Kobe. They were the most balanced team of the 3-peat...no way is that comparable to what Hakeem and Duncan did. Kobe is just a quick example of a player that was a lot better than Hakeem's or Duncan's best teammate.

[crimsonkb24]

2peat LA had no anchor if you dont count one legged 20mpg bynum

[34Dayz]

Gasol was one of the better defensive anchors in the league combine him with Bynum and you've got scary post defense + Odoms length.

@TheReal3 : in the (game 7, 00 WCF), it was Shaq who scored 9 pts in the 4th after being held in check for most of the game. It was Kobe who missed crucial free throws near the end, and Horry that covered his butt.

So really Kobe wasnt needed to "close out" any games except for that one game in the Finals and its not like they would have lost the series either way, his role was certainly comparable to parker they were both Elite Roleplayers beginning to develop into stars and both had a couple of big games in the playoffs, I have no problems saying Kobe was alittle better but combine Parker with Ginobli and the gap is gone.

[therealbig3]

Gasol was one of the better defensive anchors in the league combine him with Bynum and you've got scary post defense + Odoms length.

@TheReal3 : in the (game 7, 00 WCF), it was Shaq who scored 9 pts in the 4th after being held in check for most of the game. It was Kobe who missed crucial free throws near the end, and Horry that covered his butt.

So really Kobe wasnt needed to "close out" any games except for that one game in the Finals and its not like they would have lost the series either way, his role was certainly comparable to parker they were both Elite Roleplayers beginning to develop into stars and both had a couple of big games in the playoffs, I have no problems saying Kobe was alittle better but combine Parker with Ginobli and the gap is gone.

No, Kobe was not just a little better. Parker was not an elite role player in 03, please go back and see what he was doing that year. Ginobili was a 20 mpg bench player who averaged less than 8 ppg. He played more minutes in the playoffs, but he still averaged less than 10 ppg and shot terribly. He was not a high impact player at all that year. And Parker averaged 16/5 during the regular season, but he averaged 15/4 on terrible shooting in the playoffs. Compare that to Kobe in 00 who averaged 20/4, and averaged 21/4 in the playoffs. And he was injured...and he still played a huge role in multiple playoff wins, certainly a much bigger role than even Parker and Ginobili combined in 03. And he was just a much better player than either of them.

It may not be the intent, but it's just hating on Kobe to say that Parker was a comparable caliber player with a similar role in 03 as Kobe in 00.

[34Dayz]

I think you are overrating Bryant, he was an Elite Roleplayer just like Parker was, 20/4 or 16/6.. similar production and both had a few big games in the PS.

I said Bryant was better but the difference was not significant enough to say that Bryant had a different role in my opinion anyway. 01 is when Bryant jumped from Elite Roleplayer to 2nd Star/Robin.

[therealbig3]

I think you are overrating Bryant, he was an Elite Roleplayer just like Parker was, 20/4 or 16/6.. similar production and both had a few big games in the PS.

I said Bryant was better but the difference was not significant enough to say that Bryant had a different role in my opinion anyway. 01 is when Bryant jumped from Elite Roleplayer to 2nd Star/Robin.

There's a big difference between 21/4 and 15/4...especially when you consider the huge games that Kobe had. And Parker was not asked to close out games, he was not asked to consistently be the 2nd best player. It was Duncan having a big game, and then someone else was expected to step up, and sometimes it was Parker.

In 03, Parker had one big game against Phoenix, two big games against the Lakers, 3 big games against Dallas, and two big games against New Jersey. But those big games are what's expected from a good role player, and none of those games compare to Kobe's big games against Phoenix, Sacramento, Portland, and Indiana. They're just not comparable players, I don't know what else to say.

I think you're underrating Kobe in an attempt to overrate Shaq. Shaq's title teams always had a better supporting cast than 03 Duncan and 94 Hakeem, and that's a fact.

[ahonui06]

This thread isn't about Shaq & Kobe.

A go to scorer is more important because they are much tougher to find than a defensive anchor. Of course, the ultimate prize is a defensive anchor with an offensive touch, but apparently those are hard to find these days. It's so much easier to find a capable defensive anchor and pair them with an elite scorer than the other way around.