This should be an easy victory for my team. Not only is my frontcourt significantly better, but so is my backcourt. Nick Van Exel was a hot head, a bit of a team cancer, a chucker, a player who was routinely benched despite being in his prime, and a guy that once traded the team saw an improvement to the tune of 3 straight championships. Nick was a flashy player, and a thrilling one to watch, but a great player he was not. He has a putrid career shooting percentage of 40%, and never once shot over 42% in a season. Despite this, he loved to shoot, often to the detriment of the team. He is not a player who knows his role and could play the role of the 4th best scorer on a team while in his prime. He would wreak havoc on this team by being a malcontent chucker who would ruin team chemistry. Trevor Ariza? He doesn’t even belong on a team based on my rankings. If the prime of your career is a 23 game sample size, that is hardly much of a prime. He is a role player, who since ditching the Lakers and entering his “prime” has been a 40% shooter, and a guy who’s convinced himself he’s a three point specialist despite shooting in the low 30%’s.
Now my backcourt may not have big names for casual NBA fans but they produced excellent results and don’t come with negative qualities like both Van Exel and Ariza do. Charlie Scott’s prime? 33, 5, and 5 with 45% shooting. Van Exel’s? 18, 9, and 3 while shooting 41%. Lou Hudson’s prime? 27, 6, and 4 shooting 48%. Ariza’s? 15, 6, and 4 shooting 39%. All-Star appearances: Scott+Hudson = 11. Van Exel+Ariza = 1. Scott and Hudson were flat out better players, both career and prime wise.
Now onto the frontcourt. There is no answer for stopping prime Shaq. He was as dominant of a player as the league has ever seen. He played his best when it mattered most, and did so against all levels of competitors. He excelled vs. other great bigs, such as Hakeem, Ewing, Duncan, Robinson, Yao, etc. and I have no doubt that he would thrive against Kareem. Rodman was one of the best defenders the league has ever seen, and the best rebounder. He would shut down Hairston, take away second chance opportunities by grabbing all the missed shots from Van Exel and Ariza, and provide many second chance opportunities for my lethal offensive team. He is a rare superstar that knew and accepted his role and excelled at areas of the game that may not be considered “sexy” but were absolutely crucial to the success of the teams he was on. He was eccentric, but he gave it his all when playing, and was routinely a huge piece to every single team he was on (which included 5 championships, 1 other Finals appearance, 3 other Conference Finals appearances, and only missing the Playoffs once). Ron Artest in his prime was the best wing defender the league has seen in quite some time, and would be able to match up with Wilkes. Luckily this team doesn’t possess other wing players Artest would have to help defend, so he could put all his effort into shutting down Wilkes. Jamison would provide an excellent spark off the bench, where he’s thrived before while in the prime of his career. And he’d be an excellent stretch four to pair with Shaq to help create space in the lane. Quite simply, this frontcourt is so dominant on defense that the strength of your team would be marginalized by its defensive capabilities.
My team has too much offensive fire power for your team to contain, has the upper hand at just about every position match up wise, would be the best defensive team ever put together, and is built around a player who was possibly the most dominant force the league has ever seen. Lastly, to quote my competitor Tyler "Defense and rebounding wins championships and playoff series". To which I couldn't agree more.
