Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
ardee wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:Note: I want to expand on this later both to explain my thinking and to have fun with the theme. That may not happen until this weekend though.
Starters:Code: Select all
Player FGA Year Age
1 - John "Ned" Stockton 9.3 1997 34
2 - Khris Middleton aka "Middlefinger" 11.0 2015 23
3 - LeBron "The Prince that was Promised" James 17.6 2014 29
4 - Bobby Jones Snow 10.7 1977 25
5 - Rudy "The Tower that Stifles" Gobert 7.7 2017 24
Substitutions:Code: Select all
Connie "Azor Ahai" Hawkins 17.5 1968 25
Ser Otto the Portable 10.0 2017 23
Ryan "Giantsbane" Anderson 6.2 2010 21
Total FGA: 90.0
Okay, I'm afraid I just don't have the time or energy to go all out with my GRRM stuff right now unfortunately, so I'll just expand on this practically here.
LeBron
The basic structure to my team is based around how LeBron likes to play. Him going to work as the hub, and making use of perimeter shooting and cuts from the perimeter.
Connie
After I drafted LeBron 1st I intended to draft Connie Hawkins 6th. In the real world you can't put in a poor man's LeBron for LeBron when he goes to the bench because LeBron clones, even poor quality ones, basically don't exist. But in the all-time league there are a few of them and I'd argue that Connie might be the single closest thing to LeBron.
I realize that many will find that hard to believe, for the same reason that I knew Connie would still be available in the 6th round, but let's at least talk about what's in common with them:
1st, Connie Hawkins is clearly one of the prototypes that has led to LeBron. Baylor is typically the earliest guy mentioned and then oftentimes people skip straight to Dr. J, but this is because of how jacked up Connie's career path was for reasons that no seem at best silly, not because it's remotely strange to see Connie as being roughly the same caliber of performer as these other athletes.
2nd, Connie had a conscious when it came to shooting. By this I mean that when I look back at earlier eras of basketball to me there are the "get its" and the "get nots". Some "get nots" in that era would turn into "get its" today with the help of coaching progress and analytics, but the guys who "got it" even back then are special. Connie was one of those guys in a way that, say, Elgin Baylor was not.
3rd, Connie was a renowned passer. Between his hops, agility, and passing we're talking about a guy who could legitimately play point center in a way like LeBron can. There's limits to that of course. Connie didn't have the weight to do man defense against giants, but the man could certainly pressure shots.
To me if Connie is around today he's pretty easily a superstar. He's not LeBron-level talented no matter how you slice it, but who is? Meanwhile, LeBron has an issue that because of how he likes to play, his team tends to suffer when he goes to the bench. He could really use an understudy with enough talent to roughly pull off a LeBron impression.
Additionally, Connie would be able to play off-ball and be an unreal alley oop recipient both when he's out there with LeBron, and when other great passers have the ball like:
John
To me John Stockton is a steal anywhere in the 2nd round. The reality is that I'm not if anyone other than Tim Duncan was able to maintain impact like Stockton through greater and lesser amounts of primacy. No ego, all effort, always smart. He'd be able to thrive as a co-playmaker with LeBron, and of course his 3-point shooting would benefit from the set up immensely.
Bobby
I'm writing this after the seeds came out, and apparently my team is unseeded despite having the #1 pick. Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the impression that that means people think I didn't build wisely around James & Stockton, and since Bobby Jones was my next pick, and I picked him considerably higher than he was last time, and even last time that was probably surprisingly early for many, I would imagine some explanation is helpful here.
When I'm looking to fill out a team around a high volume star, I'm always looking for guys who excelled off-ball. That to me means I'm looking for motor, intelligence, and some signs of top-tier excellence. Bobby Jones is basically the textbook definition of this.
I'll put it this way: I expect that if we did a DPOY vote for 1977, the year I chose him, the only reason I'd expect to not vote for Jones is the presence of Bill Walton. Jones was the top defensive player on the top defensive team. Great at man defense, great at making smart ball stealing gambles, great at blocking shots, always moving, always trying.
Also note: Jones didn't shoot 3's but if he were around today I'm sure he would. At the very least he had some range and an ability to swoop and leap. I think he'd fit right in with LeBron.
Rudy
I wanted to have a classic eraser, but I needed it to be someone I knew could still do his thing in the space & pace era. Rudy Gobert, the best defender among true big men in the game today obviously fits this.
It's true he doesn't have much range, but the whole idea that you can ignore someone who doesn't score a lot is based on him not being able to move into scoring position with ease. Gobert is an agile mover with almost unprecedented length. You cannot remotely ignore him.
Khris
I would imagine Khris MIddleton and the next two picks below are leaving people skeptical. To be honest this is a little weird to me since we're all dealing with the FGA limitation. I don't know what more you could want in a 5th starter than Khris. He's a smart 3 & D player that has consistently impacted his team when he's been healthy. There really aren't many of these in history.
Otto
I honestly don't know if I can think of a player who better embodies are principle of Portability than Porter. This is a very intelligent player with great length who knows how to maximize his scoring impact with limited volume.
Ryan
Obviously Ryan Anderson is my stretch big. I was torn on whether to go in this direction because people are obviously going to see him as a defensive weakness, but the reality is that in a league with this many bigs from prior eras, I think there's a TON of room for exploitation from a stretch big. Basically any opponent I face that relies on a big defensive anchor is going to have to reckon with what to do against Anderson.
Also it should be noted that there's a reason why Anderson gets more playing time than the Frye's of the world. Anderson is an aggressive rebounder, and he has the body mass to at least make interior scorers work.
To me Ryan Anderson shouldn't have been available as the last pick of the draft. Simple as that.
ardee wrote:Ah, will be interesting to play the good Doctor. A renowned member of this board who has made enormous contributions over the years. In fact, I do believe he is the only guy who still posts regularly from when I joined the board first in 2011. He has edified many of us with his knowledge, so I really hate to say this, but I am going to try and destroy him
:Offensive Game Plan
This team was built with the vision of the 2014 Spurs in mind. I wanted as much passing and shooting as possible, and I was successful. Here's what my perimeter guys do from 3:
Nash: 45.5% on 4.5 attempts
Thompson: 42.5% on 8.1 attempts
Pierce: 39.2% on 4.6 attempts
Bradley: 40.7% on 0.8 attempts
Prince: 36.3% on 1.9 attempts
Suffice to say, this is the deadliest shooting team in the tournament, including the one with Curry. Literally every one of them besides Prince cannot be left open beyond the arc under any circumstances. The spacing will be absolutely insane.
With that in mind, I'll explore my two primary offensive options:
1. Nash/Bosh PnR/PnP
Assuming the crossmatches of Stockton on Nash and Jones on Bosh, this is going to be a deadly play. The version of Stockton chosen by Doctor MJ is 35 years old, and it will be almost impossible for him to fight through a solid Bosh screen. MJ will almost have to switch, leaving Nash guarded by Bobby Jones. Now, Jones was a fine defensive player, one of the best ever in fact, but at 6'9 I don't believe he can keep up with Nash.
Nash will either be able to get by him to the rim, where he shot 67%, pullup from mid-range, or yank a 3, in case the switch doesn't happen fast enough. All these are very efficient plays. Or, he could hit Bosh on the roll, who shot 72% at the rim that year. Poor Stockton isn't stopping him. If we choose to pop, Bosh shot 49.5% from between 16 and 23 feet.
If they send a double to either Nash or Bosh from the perimeter, Klay and Pierce are lights out from three.
Again, Jones is a great defensive player but this kind of play is far ahead of his time. He simply wouldn't know how to defend it. MJ would have to use LeBron to control the Nash/Bosh PnR, and it still wouldn't be too successful, and it would drain him badly. There's just too much ground to cover given the spacing I have. Even if Gobert came out, despite him being a phenomenal defensive player, he's too much of a rim protector, he wouldn't be able to keep up with Nash on the perimeter, or the ball movement.
It wouldn't be a dunk every possession like the Nash/Amare pick and roll, but no doubt this would be a layup or a 3 every time we ran the play.
2. Nash/Walton pick and roll or Walton from the high post
I suggest watching as much of game 6 of the 1977 NBA Finals as you can find. Watch Walton's passing, screening, and just overall game sense.
Realize there was no 3 point line then.
Now imagine him being able to do those same things, but with 3 40% 3-point shooters. Scary, no?
If we give him the ball in the high post, first of all, it drags Gobert out. This automatically causes problems for the good Doctor, because Gobert is a classic rim protector. Walton wasn't known for his post-up game, but it was certainly good enough whenever he needed it (remember him scoring 44 on 21/22 shooting in the National Championship?). We won't be using it much though, just need him to keep Gobert on his toes so that Bosh and the 3 perimeter players can set screens for each other to provide Walton with either cutters or an open guy to hit on the 3-point line.
Again, if you send a double on ANY play, you end up with a 40% three-point shooter open unless Prince is in the game, and he shoots.... 36%.
If we really have nothing else going, Nash or Pierce can iso. I assume LeBron will be guarding Pierce, and Pierce has shown the ability to go mano-e-mano with LeBron at any point (remember the game 7 duel?). It's not an option we'll use too often since this motion based 2014-Spurs-esque passing/shooting offense will always generate something.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter who is guarding who, because we'll be running so many screens that MJ will HAVE to switch, and as soon as we get an open shot or an unfavorable matchup, it's good night.
Also, as Doctor MJ doesn't really have a huge post-threat to worry about, I'm comfortable playing Prince or Pierce at the 4 for 10 minutes a game, giving me up to 4 lights out shooters with Walton and Nash. That will be like my equivalent of the death lineup for Golden State.
I don't see a way for him to stop this offense.
When it comes to LeBron, just having Walton there will make it harder for LeBron to drive and put that 79% rim percentage to use. He had a similar impact against Erving in the 1977 Finals. While Doc was able to score and have some posters, Walton was enough of a presence to keep the Blazers in it.
LeBron'll see a combination of Prince and Pierce. Actually, every second Prince is on the floor with LeBron, he'll have instructions to incessantly hound him. Obviously 2014 LeBron > 2004 Kobe but Prince was proven to be a devastating man defender in the 2004 Finals and here he has a better anchor backing him up than either of the Wallace brothers. If LeBron decides to post-up, yeah, I will send Bosh to double, he is quick enough to recover.
Nash is a liability, but it's not as if he's guarding Magic or Penny. I'll put him on Middleton, and if MJ wants to go to him extra, that's fine, it keeps the ball out of LeBron's hands.
Generally speaking, I don't expect to shut down LeBron, I think he'll get his efficient 27-28 ppg, but the thing is that Doctor MJ's team really lacks creation outside of him. He has shooters in Middleton/Anderson/Porter but the fact is that none of them can create for themselves. The entire team is insanely dependant on LeBron's penetration. Stockton doesn't have a reliable PnR partner to do the damage he is capable of.
Even if they run a Stockton/LeBron pick and roll, I have no issue with Walton or Bosh coming out to help, since MJ doesn't really have the inside threats to punish me.
If I stay at home on the shooters, defend LeBron 1 on 1 as well as possible, this should be relatively straightforward. This team reminds me a bit of a souped up version of the 2009 Cavs. This sort of team would be devastating in a regular league, but not in an all-time league where everyone has multiple elite threats.
Overall
I applaud Doctor MJ for building a balanced team around LeBron, but I just can't see them defending me effectively. LeBron will get his, but the players around him are relatively limited, making it easier for me to slow his offense down.
I honestly think this would look a lot like the 2014 Finals. LeBron would win one game by himself, but then his team would drown in a barrage of layups and 3s.
Doctor MJ wrote:Alright so, I just don't have the energy right now to write up more. I expect that will be a disadvantage, but not the only one given the seeding.
I'll say up front I really like ardee's team. I think it's well built without any glaring weaknesses.
I do also quite like my team, though at this point I'm used to people not liking my teams as much as I do.
I'm going to be largely responding to ardee below but I'll say this up front:
1st: I don't feel good about jumping in with rebuttals. It feels unfair to ardee if this is the last thing a voter reads before they vote, so please don't vote until ardee responds again.
2nd: I love Nash & Walton, and I think they can be great together...but I don't think you can easily switch between a Nash-style offense and a Walton-style offense. One has a player being ball dominant, one is more of a pinball approach. It can be good either way, but both of these guys are noteworthy specifically because they had bizarrely massive impact used a particular way. Take a little control away from Nash and he's not the same guy. Give Walton less prominence as a passer and you remember he's just not a great scorer.
It's worth acknowledging that there's a little of this with LeBron & Stockton, and my argument is specifically based on thinking that Stockton's impact isn't really based on control despite the control he exerted in his early prime. He took on less and less primacy over time and seemed to be able to do it perfectly.
In a nutshell:
While I prefer Nash to Stockton as an alpha, as a beta I certainly prefer Stockton.
Alright moving on to respond to ardee below:ardee wrote:Ah, will be interesting to play the good Doctor. A renowned member of this board who has made enormous contributions over the years. In fact, I do believe he is the only guy who still posts regularly from when I joined the board first in 2011. He has edified many of us with his knowledge, so I really hate to say this, but I am going to try and destroy him
Aww shucks.Offensive Game Plan
This team was built with the vision of the 2014 Spurs in mind. I wanted as much passing and shooting as possible, and I was successful. Here's what my perimeter guys do from 3:
Nash: 45.5% on 4.5 attempts
Thompson: 42.5% on 8.1 attempts
Pierce: 39.2% on 4.6 attempts
Bradley: 40.7% on 0.8 attempts
Prince: 36.3% on 1.9 attempts
Suffice to say, this is the deadliest shooting team in the tournament, including the one with Curry. Literally every one of them besides Prince cannot be left open beyond the arc under any circumstances. The spacing will be absolutely insane.
I definitely like the team, and I don't hate the Pierce pick, but I will not that when you're talking about him here, you're basically talking about him as if he played like Ray Allen did. In reality Pierce was always much more a lead guard-type. He didn't need to be ball dominant by any means, but that still doesn't make him an epic shooter, and I don't think ardee's going to want to run the team with Pierce as the offensive alpha the way Pierce actually preferred to play.With that in mind, I'll explore my two primary offensive options:
1. Nash/Bosh PnR/PnP
Assuming the crossmatches of Stockton on Nash and Jones on Bosh, this is going to be a deadly play. The version of Stockton chosen by Doctor MJ is 35 years old, and it will be almost impossible for him to fight through a solid Bosh screen. MJ will almost have to switch, leaving Nash guarded by Bobby Jones. Now, Jones was a fine defensive player, one of the best ever in fact, but at 6'9 I don't believe he can keep up with Nash.
Nash will either be able to get by him to the rim, where he shot 67%, pullup from mid-range, or yank a 3, in case the switch doesn't happen fast enough. All these are very efficient plays. Or, he could hit Bosh on the roll, who shot 72% at the rim that year. Poor Stockton isn't stopping him. If we choose to pop, Bosh shot 49.5% from between 16 and 23 feet.
If they send a double to either Nash or Bosh from the perimeter, Klay and Pierce are lights out from three.
Again, Jones is a great defensive player but this kind of play is far ahead of his time. He simply wouldn't know how to defend it. MJ would have to use LeBron to control the Nash/Bosh PnR, and it still wouldn't be too successful, and it would drain him badly. There's just too much ground to cover given the spacing I have. Even if Gobert came out, despite him being a phenomenal defensive player, he's too much of a rim protector, he wouldn't be able to keep up with Nash on the perimeter, or the ball movement.
It wouldn't be a dunk every possession like the Nash/Amare pick and roll, but no doubt this would be a layup or a 3 every time we ran the play.
Okay now I know this is your project and all but to be clear:
I personally don't think it makes a lot of sense to talk about an All-Time league where the criticisms toward one of the best, highest motor, and smartest defenders of any era gets knocked because he wouldn't know certain things. Jones would have no problem learning these things, because anyone smart can figure it out, and anyone with the requisite length and agility would do about as well as you can expect.
Now, Nash is GOAT at pick & roll and a great shooter. I'm not suggesting we could shut him down. But basically everyone on my team is well suited to handle such switches except Ryan Anderson. When Anderson's in, I totally get looking to exploit him, but anyone else is going to handle it about as well as anyone could.2. Nash/Walton pick and roll or Walton from the high post
I suggest watching as much of game 6 of the 1977 NBA Finals as you can find. Watch Walton's passing, screening, and just overall game sense.
Realize there was no 3 point line then.
Now imagine him being able to do those same things, but with 3 40% 3-point shooters. Scary, no?
Okay jumping in here just to hammer it in again:
I don't think you can switch between these approaches that easily. This is a philosophical statement I suppose, but I think part of the reason that Nash, Walton, and LeBron have such +/- impact is the fact that the team basically cannot reformulate itself around very different strategies that easily.
I do think though with the Nash/Walton pick & roll you can get some of the same benefit of the Walton-based offense, so I defintely see that as quite scary, but if you relegate Nash to something other than his signature game, you're going to reduce his effectiveness significantly, and given his defensive weakness that would make him a poor #2 draft choice in this league.If we give him the ball in the high post, first of all, it drags Gobert out. This automatically causes problems for the good Doctor, because Gobert is a classic rim protector. Walton wasn't known for his post-up game, but it was certainly good enough whenever he needed it (remember him scoring 44 on 21/22 shooting in the National Championship?). We won't be using it much though, just need him to keep Gobert on his toes so that Bosh and the 3 perimeter players can set screens for each other to provide Walton with either cutters or an open guy to hit on the 3-point line.
Walton's injuries killed off that aspect of his game. He still continued to improve in other facets, but you had better believe that if Walton tries to actually score on the interior my team is going to be thrilled.Again, if you send a double on ANY play, you end up with a 40% three-point shooter open unless Prince is in the game, and he shoots.... 36%.
We're not going to need to put a double on Walton. If you want to try to have him volume scorer against All-Time level teams, I think I can speak for the whole league when we say that's fine with us.If we really have nothing else going, Nash or Pierce can iso. I assume LeBron will be guarding Pierce, and Pierce has shown the ability to go mano-e-mano with LeBron at any point (remember the game 7 duel?). It's not an option we'll use too often since this motion based 2014-Spurs-esque passing/shooting offense will always generate something.
Better than nothing I suppose, but I mean, I've got LeBron who I can iso with. If you're not beating us with smart offense, you're not beating us.Otherwise, it doesn't matter who is guarding who, because we'll be running so many screens that MJ will HAVE to switch, and as soon as we get an open shot or an unfavorable matchup, it's good night.
I was thinking of switch defense when I drafted. I have a team that is extraordinarily long, agile, and smart. Anderson is the weak spot as noted. I would give Anderson a try out there at strategic points to see if his 3's and spacing was worth more than his defense cost, but I'd agree that with him out there you'd be strongly considering a pick & roll approach.Also, as Doctor MJ doesn't really have a huge post-threat to worry about, I'm comfortable playing Prince or Pierce at the 4 for 10 minutes a game, giving me up to 4 lights out shooters with Walton and Nash. That will be like my equivalent of the death lineup for Golden State.
Just because LeBron can do everything else well doesn't mean he isn't an interior threat, I'll be curious what you do if you don't commit Walton to him.I don't see a way for him to stop this offense.
You've got a great team no doubt.When it comes to LeBron, just having Walton there will make it harder for LeBron to drive and put that 79% rim percentage to use. He had a similar impact against Erving in the 1977 Finals. While Doc was able to score and have some posters, Walton was enough of a presence to keep the Blazers in it.
LeBron'll see a combination of Prince and Pierce. Actually, every second Prince is on the floor with LeBron, he'll have instructions to incessantly hound him. Obviously 2014 LeBron > 2004 Kobe but Prince was proven to be a devastating man defender in the 2004 Finals and here he has a better anchor backing him up than either of the Wallace brothers. If LeBron decides to post-up, yeah, I will send Bosh to double, he is quick enough to recover.
All of this makes sense, but LeBron's teammates here make those options way less useful than they'd be against normal NBA competition. Doubling LeBron has never worked out well for anyone unless they can leave a man who is utterly useless as a scoring threat. None of the players on my roster qualify as that.
Voters should remember that that all of my players are scoring threats. No most of them can't iso, but that's purposeful. I wanted guys who were known for hurting the opponent when the opponent was focused on an alpha.Nash is a liability, but it's not as if he's guarding Magic or Penny. I'll put him on Middleton, and if MJ wants to go to him extra, that's fine, it keeps the ball out of LeBron's hands.
Middleton is 6 foot 8 and can hit from 3 when he's open. If Nash is guarding him, he'll literally have a clear shot pretty much all the time.
It's not keeping it out of LeBron's hands when LeBron gets an assist for a 3.Generally speaking, I don't expect to shut down LeBron, I think he'll get his efficient 27-28 ppg, but the thing is that Doctor MJ's team really lacks creation outside of him. He has shooters in Middleton/Anderson/Porter but the fact is that none of them can create for themselves. The entire team is insanely dependant on LeBron's penetration. Stockton doesn't have a reliable PnR partner to do the damage he is capable of.
When you say "creator" here to me it implies making something from nothing. As in, the defense has you covered as well as possible, so now it's up to someone to make the best of it. The problem with that thinking here is that the only for that to not be LeBron is if you double him, and the moment you do that I have smart players all around him who can exploit the 4-on-3 advantage.
Just because they aren't iso guys doesn't mean they are adept at teamplay. I chose them specifically because of how they fit together as a team.Even if they run a Stockton/LeBron pick and roll, I have no issue with Walton or Bosh coming out to help, since MJ doesn't really have the inside threats to punish me.
Incidentally I see now reason why I can't do Stockton/LeBron pick & rolls. While I expect my primary attack to be LeBron-centered, pick & roll is something that basically everyone can do because the other players on the team don't really need to change their approach when we use that technique.
Re: No inside threats. You're thinking to literally. I'm not going to attack you on the inside with other guys going one on one in the post. If you vacate the interior I'll have guys swoop in for easy pass-dunks. I specifically didn't want a class post-scoring center because I prefer to have that space available.
I'll note again that while I'm unsure if Anderson will be able to hang in this match up, there's no doubting the spacing damage he'd do to you here.If I stay at home on the shooters, defend LeBron 1 on 1 as well as possible, this should be relatively straightforward. This team reminds me a bit of a souped up version of the 2009 Cavs. This sort of team would be devastating in a regular league, but not in an all-time league where everyone has multiple elite threats.
Whether you're talking about the real NBA or this super-league, the rule about defending LeBron one-on-one is the same:
If he's bigger and stronger than the man he's guarding, he will own that guy.
You've said you're not using Walton in this capacity, so the one-on-one thing just won't be an option for you. It's going to come down how well others can help without opening up the court too much for my other guys. And again you've got a great team, but so do I.
You may feel some pain as we rip your defensive schemes apart...Overall
I applaud Doctor MJ for building a balanced team around LeBron, but I just can't see them defending me effectively. LeBron will get his, but the players around him are relatively limited, making it easier for me to slow his offense down.
I honestly think this would look a lot like the 2014 Finals. LeBron would win one game by himself, but then his team would drown in a barrage of layups and 3s.
As mentioned, with any well-built team in this league, there's no way to really do great against them defensively. ardee's team will have a lot of success...but I really don't see what room there is to talk as if the players I have are limited.
Or rather I should say: There's always this push-pull in these leagues. Do you pick all alphas, or do you build a real team? I would actually say ardee has built a real team as well so I don't want to knock him, but I do think fit and strategy are more problematic for him than myself. I have more guys who excel in off-ball roles, and I have by FAR the best scoring option in the on-ball role.
Re: like 2014 finals. I think it's crucial to understand that the Heat were basically out of gas in that series. They developed a strategy together that required vast amounts of energy on defense, and between 4 straight years of finals trips and aging, it just ran out of juice.
I'll add that all of my players are in their 20s except John Stockton, and this Stockton still made All-D and would continue to be exceptionally effective for another half decade.
Doctor MJ wrote:Offensive Game Plan
This team was built with the vision of the 2014 Spurs in mind. I wanted as much passing and shooting as possible, and I was successful. Here's what my perimeter guys do from 3:
Nash: 45.5% on 4.5 attempts
Thompson: 42.5% on 8.1 attempts
Pierce: 39.2% on 4.6 attempts
Bradley: 40.7% on 0.8 attempts
Prince: 36.3% on 1.9 attempts
Suffice to say, this is the deadliest shooting team in the tournament, including the one with Curry. Literally every one of them besides Prince cannot be left open beyond the arc under any circumstances. The spacing will be absolutely insane.
I definitely like the team, and I don't hate the Pierce pick, but I will not that when you're talking about him here, you're basically talking about him as if he played like Ray Allen did. In reality Pierce was always much more a lead guard-type. He didn't need to be ball dominant by any means, but that still doesn't make him an epic shooter, and I don't think ardee's going to want to run the team with Pierce as the offensive alpha the way Pierce actually preferred to play.
With that in mind, I'll explore my two primary offensive options:
1. Nash/Bosh PnR/PnP
Assuming the crossmatches of Stockton on Nash and Jones on Bosh, this is going to be a deadly play. The version of Stockton chosen by Doctor MJ is 35 years old, and it will be almost impossible for him to fight through a solid Bosh screen. MJ will almost have to switch, leaving Nash guarded by Bobby Jones. Now, Jones was a fine defensive player, one of the best ever in fact, but at 6'9 I don't believe he can keep up with Nash.
Nash will either be able to get by him to the rim, where he shot 67%, pullup from mid-range, or yank a 3, in case the switch doesn't happen fast enough. All these are very efficient plays. Or, he could hit Bosh on the roll, who shot 72% at the rim that year. Poor Stockton isn't stopping him. If we choose to pop, Bosh shot 49.5% from between 16 and 23 feet.
If they send a double to either Nash or Bosh from the perimeter, Klay and Pierce are lights out from three.
Again, Jones is a great defensive player but this kind of play is far ahead of his time. He simply wouldn't know how to defend it. MJ would have to use LeBron to control the Nash/Bosh PnR, and it still wouldn't be too successful, and it would drain him badly. There's just too much ground to cover given the spacing I have. Even if Gobert came out, despite him being a phenomenal defensive player, he's too much of a rim protector, he wouldn't be able to keep up with Nash on the perimeter, or the ball movement.
It wouldn't be a dunk every possession like the Nash/Amare pick and roll, but no doubt this would be a layup or a 3 every time we ran the play.
Okay now I know this is your project and all but to be clear:
I personally don't think it makes a lot of sense to talk about an All-Time league where the criticisms toward one of the best, highest motor, and smartest defenders of any era gets knocked because he wouldn't know certain things. Jones would have no problem learning these things, because anyone smart can figure it out, and anyone with the requisite length and agility would do about as well as you can expect.
Now, Nash is GOAT at pick & roll and a great shooter. I'm not suggesting we could shut him down. But basically everyone on my team is well suited to handle such switches except Ryan Anderson. When Anderson's in, I totally get looking to exploit him, but anyone else is going to handle it about as well as anyone could.
2. Nash/Walton pick and roll or Walton from the high post
I suggest watching as much of game 6 of the 1977 NBA Finals as you can find. Watch Walton's passing, screening, and just overall game sense.
Realize there was no 3 point line then.
Now imagine him being able to do those same things, but with 3 40% 3-point shooters. Scary, no?
Okay jumping in here just to hammer it in again:
I don't think you can switch between these approaches that easily. This is a philosophical statement I suppose, but I think part of the reason that Nash, Walton, and LeBron have such +/- impact is the fact that the team basically cannot reformulate itself around very different strategies that easily.
I do think though with the Nash/Walton pick & roll you can get some of the same benefit of the Walton-based offense, so I defintely see that as quite scary, but if you relegate Nash to something other than his signature game, you're going to reduce his effectiveness significantly, and given his defensive weakness that would make him a poor #2 draft choice in this league.
If we give him the ball in the high post, first of all, it drags Gobert out. This automatically causes problems for the good Doctor, because Gobert is a classic rim protector. Walton wasn't known for his post-up game, but it was certainly good enough whenever he needed it (remember him scoring 44 on 21/22 shooting in the National Championship?). We won't be using it much though, just need him to keep Gobert on his toes so that Bosh and the 3 perimeter players can set screens for each other to provide Walton with either cutters or an open guy to hit on the 3-point line.
Walton's injuries killed off that aspect of his game. He still continued to improve in other facets, but you had better believe that if Walton tries to actually score on the interior my team is going to be thrilled.
Again, if you send a double on ANY play, you end up with a 40% three-point shooter open unless Prince is in the game, and he shoots.... 36%.
We're not going to need to put a double on Walton. If you want to try to have him volume scorer against All-Time level teams, I think I can speak for the whole league when we say that's fine with us.
If we really have nothing else going, Nash or Pierce can iso. I assume LeBron will be guarding Pierce, and Pierce has shown the ability to go mano-e-mano with LeBron at any point (remember the game 7 duel?). It's not an option we'll use too often since this motion based 2014-Spurs-esque passing/shooting offense will always generate something.
Better than nothing I suppose, but I mean, I've got LeBron who I can iso with. If you're not beating us with smart offense, you're not beating us.
Otherwise, it doesn't matter who is guarding who, because we'll be running so many screens that MJ will HAVE to switch, and as soon as we get an open shot or an unfavorable matchup, it's good night.
I was thinking of switch defense when I drafted. I have a team that is extraordinarily long, agile, and smart. Anderson is the weak spot as noted. I would give Anderson a try out there at strategic points to see if his 3's and spacing was worth more than his defense cost, but I'd agree that with him out there you'd be strongly considering a pick & roll approach.
Also, as Doctor MJ doesn't really have a huge post-threat to worry about, I'm comfortable playing Prince or Pierce at the 4 for 10 minutes a game, giving me up to 4 lights out shooters with Walton and Nash. That will be like my equivalent of the death lineup for Golden State.
Just because LeBron can do everything else well doesn't mean he isn't an interior threat, I'll be curious what you do if you don't commit Walton to him.
I don't see a way for him to stop this offense.
You've got a great team no doubt.When it comes to LeBron, just having Walton there will make it harder for LeBron to drive and put that 79% rim percentage to use. He had a similar impact against Erving in the 1977 Finals. While Doc was able to score and have some posters, Walton was enough of a presence to keep the Blazers in it.
LeBron'll see a combination of Prince and Pierce. Actually, every second Prince is on the floor with LeBron, he'll have instructions to incessantly hound him. Obviously 2014 LeBron > 2004 Kobe but Prince was proven to be a devastating man defender in the 2004 Finals and here he has a better anchor backing him up than either of the Wallace brothers. If LeBron decides to post-up, yeah, I will send Bosh to double, he is quick enough to recover.
All of this makes sense, but LeBron's teammates here make those options way less useful than they'd be against normal NBA competition. Doubling LeBron has never worked out well for anyone unless they can leave a man who is utterly useless as a scoring threat. None of the players on my roster qualify as that.
Voters should remember that that all of my players are scoring threats. No most of them can't iso, but that's purposeful. I wanted guys who were known for hurting the opponent when the opponent was focused on an alpha.Nash is a liability, but it's not as if he's guarding Magic or Penny. I'll put him on Middleton, and if MJ wants to go to him extra, that's fine, it keeps the ball out of LeBron's hands.
Middleton is 6 foot 8 and can hit from 3 when he's open. If Nash is guarding him, he'll literally have a clear shot pretty much all the time.
It's not keeping it out of LeBron's hands when LeBron gets an assist for a 3.Generally speaking, I don't expect to shut down LeBron, I think he'll get his efficient 27-28 ppg, but the thing is that Doctor MJ's team really lacks creation outside of him. He has shooters in Middleton/Anderson/Porter but the fact is that none of them can create for themselves. The entire team is insanely dependant on LeBron's penetration. Stockton doesn't have a reliable PnR partner to do the damage he is capable of.
When you say "creator" here to me it implies making something from nothing. As in, the defense has you covered as well as possible, so now it's up to someone to make the best of it. The problem with that thinking here is that the only for that to not be LeBron is if you double him, and the moment you do that I have smart players all around him who can exploit the 4-on-3 advantage.
Just because they aren't iso guys doesn't mean they are adept at teamplay. I chose them specifically because of how they fit together as a team.Even if they run a Stockton/LeBron pick and roll, I have no issue with Walton or Bosh coming out to help, since MJ doesn't really have the inside threats to punish me.
Incidentally I see now reason why I can't do Stockton/LeBron pick & rolls. While I expect my primary attack to be LeBron-centered, pick & roll is something that basically everyone can do because the other players on the team don't really need to change their approach when we use that technique.
Re: No inside threats. You're thinking to literally. I'm not going to attack you on the inside with other guys going one on one in the post. If you vacate the interior I'll have guys swoop in for easy pass-dunks. I specifically didn't want a class post-scoring center because I prefer to have that space available.
I'll note again that while I'm unsure if Anderson will be able to hang in this match up, there's no doubting the spacing damage he'd do to you here.If I stay at home on the shooters, defend LeBron 1 on 1 as well as possible, this should be relatively straightforward. This team reminds me a bit of a souped up version of the 2009 Cavs. This sort of team would be devastating in a regular league, but not in an all-time league where everyone has multiple elite threats.
Whether you're talking about the real NBA or this super-league, the rule about defending LeBron one-on-one is the same:
If he's bigger and stronger than the man he's guarding, he will own that guy.
You've said you're not using Walton in this capacity, so the one-on-one thing just won't be an option for you. It's going to come down how well others can help without opening up the court too much for my other guys. And again you've got a great team, but so do I.
You may feel some pain as we rip your defensive schemes apart...Overall
I applaud Doctor MJ for building a balanced team around LeBron, but I just can't see them defending me effectively. LeBron will get his, but the players around him are relatively limited, making it easier for me to slow his offense down.
I honestly think this would look a lot like the 2014 Finals. LeBron would win one game by himself, but then his team would drown in a barrage of layups and 3s.
As mentioned, with any well-built team in this league, there's no way to really do great against them defensively. ardee's team will have a lot of success...but I really don't see what room there is to talk as if the players I have are limited.
Or rather I should say: There's always this push-pull in these leagues. Do you pick all alphas, or do you build a real team? I would actually say ardee has built a real team as well so I don't want to knock him, but I do think fit and strategy are more problematic for him than myself. I have more guys who excel in off-ball roles, and I have by FAR the best scoring option in the on-ball role.
Re: like 2014 finals. I think it's crucial to understand that the Heat were basically out of gas in that series. They developed a strategy together that required vast amounts of energy on defense, and between 4 straight years of finals trips and aging, it just ran out of juice.
I'll add that all of my players are in their 20s except John Stockton, and this Stockton still made All-D and would continue to be exceptionally effective for another half decade.
drza wrote:2) Doc's squad feels like a Megatron version of the 2009/2010 Cavs. LeBron is himself, and that team was predicated on having strong role players around him as either shooters or defensive parts. Stockton isn't the volume scorer that a hot Mo Williams could be, but in every other way he's WAY better. He'd be a smart and high-efficiency off-ball shooter, and obviously he's a great floor general when LeBron is playing off ball. Middleton/Jones/Gobert is an outstanding combo of positional defense and finishing ability on offense. The Connie as LeBron-junior off the bench is brilliant, and there's a lot of frontcourt versatility. Not a lot of backcourt depth, though.
ElGee wrote:Bosh plays the Amare roll, but he's an offensive downgrade there across the board. (Amare was a phenomenal PnR player!)
ardee wrote:ElGee wrote:Bosh plays the Amare roll, but he's an offensive downgrade there across the board. (Amare was a phenomenal PnR player!)
Should note that Bosh is a much better mid-range shooter than Amare. That's why we'd go pick and pop as much as pick and roll depending on the situation, this would create the openings you are talking about that Amare did, drawing the defender out 16-23 feet away from the basket.
ElGee wrote:I kind of want to hear more from the coaches before voting. Doc, how many minutes to see Hawk playing? Do you have a small-ball lineup?
)Doctor MJ wrote:ElGee wrote:I kind of want to hear more from the coaches before voting. Doc, how many minutes to see Hawk playing? Do you have a small-ball lineup?
Let's see, some lineups I had on my mind:
Stockton/Middleton/LeBron/Jones/Gobert - starters, obviously
MIddleton & Porter can switch easily
LeBron & Connie can switch as noted.
My small ball lineup would have Anderson at the 5 likely with LeBron at the 4. Anderson can of course play the 4 as well.
When LeBron is at the 4, one option is to have Connie at the 3, though on offense Connie would likely be playing a role similar to Jones does at the 4.
The only guy I haven't mentioned is Stockton. Clearly when he's out it will be a long ball lineup, and we'd be looking to use switches even more so. My role players like Middleton would be assigned to Nash for most of the time so as to conserve the energy of LeBron, but it would be a team effort.
I don't enjoy breaking these things down by minutes for the same reason that, frankly, I'm finding myself frustrated trying to defend Anderson as a pick. I think having a stretch big makes a ton of sense, but how much he'd play would completely depend on how much benefit he gave us compared to the cost, and it's just so hard to say. If I say he plays a lot then people are going to focus on his defensive issues. If I say he hardly plays, then he's a wasted pick. All that makes an argument for never drafting someone like him...but of course in the real world stretch bigs always have these issues and that doesn't stop them from having some great success whenever they aren't the focal point of opponent strategy.
Connie will definitely be playing whenever LeBron is out and whenever Stockton is out. Basically 2 out of those 3 guys will be out there at all times. While Connie isn't the same player as Stockton, he's a true star and he's got great playmaking.
I could see it being something like:
LeBron 36 MPG
Stockton 30 MPG
Connie 30 MPG
Last note on what you mentioned about Bobby Jones' shooting:
Something that I basically just accept is that some people tend to judge shooting ability based on what the numbers back then literally say. The numbers in 1977 say Jones is an average free throw shooter with no 3-point background. And that is what it is.
I just don't think it's that hard to learn how to shoot open 3's. I mean, the original 3 & D guy is Bruce Bowen. Bowen is objectively speaking a worse shooter by all measures than Jones except that he obviously spent a ton of time practicing open 3s. If Bowen can do it, I tend to think almost anyone can.
Now that doesn't mean I'm assuming Andre Drummond can, but anyone who spent a lot of time on the perimeter, had good coordination, work ethic, BBIQ, and solid shooting data, I mean, why wouldn't they be able to hit these 3s?
Not saying that the odds are 100%, but I just don't see much point in treating it like it was 0% when the real odds are far closer to 100% than to 0%.
Now as I say that, there is always the question looming overhead about what it means to bring guys from the past into the present. I'm on record saying I think it's silly to use unadjusted FGA to put limits on the team because of the way it penalizes players of the past in a project specifically designed to include players of the past. It didn't make sense last time, and it didn't make sense to repeat.
(I say this as someone who knows how hard it is to run project and who appreciates whenever anyone runs one. I've probably made problematic choices at least as bad in any project I've ever ran so I don't claim to be superior in the role...but that doesn't mean I can't bitch a little, right?
Last time I really felt like I got burned because I built my team around all eras of players, so this time I believe 5 of my 8 players are from the 2010s. That's ridiculously present-focused, and yet still, it might have been wiser to focus even more on the present because of the fact that 3 & D is the way to go, and the role only exists in contemporary players. But I find the idea absurd. Clearly there were plenty of talents in the past who could have played the role and I find it way more interesting to actually place great players in roles I think they could thrive in than to stick to literal roles.