NBA/ABA Decades League Discussion Thread

[Warspite]

2. Miller forever: Are you realy going to play a C with 42%FG at PF? Especialy after how well it worked last time he was a PF in his rookie yr.

Whenever a 3rd or 4th option offensive player gets asked to be a volume scorer, of course their FG% is going to suffer, but in the right role, their efficiency is increased. Kareem will be my 1st option. I didn't add him in the 3rd round for firepower. I added him for everything else that he does. He will do everything except shoot on my team. He can man-defend, block shots, rebound on both ends, set picks, pass, and hustle. I drafted him because he a great basketball player, and his if his one weakness is that his offense sucks (which it doesn't in the low post as a cutter/roller/post-up option), then so be it. Add the fact that 60's players (including Lucas being taken one spot before) were in short supply, I don't see why getting Nate Thurmond in the 3rd round was in enough to make me a bottom-feeding team in this league from where you're sitting.

Also, this whole playing-out-of-position thing is something I don't put stock in too much. Obviously, getting 5 GOAT centers together would suck, but on my team, I don't see skyscraping being a problem. I'd rather be too big than too small. I think that Nate Thurmond is a great basketball player and his offense is on par with Russell's. His defense is still top-10 all time for a big, and his intangibles may not be there, but I have Kareem to offset this.

Going from C to PF or PF to C for a strong, athletic big is not a big deal. I feel like Nate Thurmond fits with this team very well. His 14-foot jumpshot may have sucked, but he's had no problem relinquishing it, and he's had no problem passing it to better options. In fact, for a big, he was good at it.

I usually wouldn't put so much stock into a fellow competitor's favorite team list, but you being who you are, I can't help but feel like I did something wrong to end up in the same category as two guys with 120 ppg 4-man teams and bad defense.

I concede your points. Its all going to come out in any writeups anyway and thats what I was alluding to. I also wondered if maybe you had soemthing else up your sleeve.
I apologise if you feel offended. I do like your team and I know that Thurmond (Who I have had 3 times on my team) will be able to dominate in some matchups and not in others. With KAJ you can easily move him to a PF type slot and let Thurmond guard Cs and use KAJ and his quickness. They can be a Wallacex2 type of duo no doubt. On my team Thurmond doesnt work but because you have KAJ who has more range it very well can. It also clears KAJ to not have to do teh dirty work.

[bastillon]

i just did a quick normalization to 100 poss/game.

but KG played at WAY slower pace and actually only GSW plays at that pace in today's league. you missed that part probably.

anyway,

Magic
Sloan
Pippen
Cowens
Dwight

what's most interesting at the first sight is that they're all pretty even in terms of size (relatively speaking). the smallest guy on my team is 6'6 by today's standards and the tallest is 6'11. with that in mind, you can see they can deal easily with mismatches. everyone can guard everyone.

that's gonna be my strategy defensively. I'll try not to double-team unless necessary because this is a great defensive team and although help D is excellent, I'm trying to keep my defense together, any team will have a hard time collapsing it. what you're dealing with individually is no easy task anyway.

you have 60s Jerry Sloan who made all-defensive team in the '69 over guys like Havlicek and Jerry West and was widely considered as one of the best defenders in the league at the time. you have probably the GOAT perimeter defender in Pippen. you have solid defender in Magic who would be hidden on the worst offensive player behind Sloan/Pippen combo while being focused on rebounding and passing lanes. then you have Dave Cowens who was good defender and made couple of defensive teams, once even edging prime KAJ. finally, for some overrated, for some great defender - my dominant defensive C, Dwight - nuff said.

this is certainly a great defensive team, but the most important aspect of the game - rebounding is dominated by them even more. not only because Dwight has 21% TRB (Wilt level) and Cowens 18% (Barkley) but mainly because there are flat out amazing rebounders on the perimeter. Magic is obviously very impactful with his 11% TRB, but Pippen and Sloan have the same rebounding rate as Magic!

with this kind of defense and rebounding, I'm hoping to get out and run a lot, this reincarnation of Showtime is probably even better overall, because of the ability to get stops with ease. I'm virtually unstoppable in transition with Magic... especially when he's running with Pippen, Cowens and Dwight with Sloan trailing/spreading the floor. I feel like there are a lot of great defensive teams in this competition and you can struggle against many teams offensively, regardless of how ridiculous offensively you are. so I'm hoping for a lot of easy points which would make my offense fluid. I'm hoping for Dwight's putbacks, for tons of transition buckets, free throws etc.

where this team is flawed is half court game. obviously you're gonna be respectable with Magic, but without much shooting, I feel like there can be a lot of frustration offensively...especially with these ridiculous line-ups here, with a lot of great help defense. I really could use someone other than Sloan to provide better spacing. Magic and Cowens are very good shooters. Sloan and Pippen are decent shooters. Dwight doesn't have any range whatsoever. this is an area I'm concerned about, but from what I know about other teams, there are gonna be a lot of teams like that - or even worse - with a lot of volume scorers who don't have any room to operate. we'll see ...

and then again, I could understand the criticism of Sloan's pick but before you wanna bash me, consider that:

-since all-defensive teams have been established as an award in '69, Sloan was always first or 2nd teamer (not counting 22 games from '76), neck and neck with Jerry West and John Havlicek.
-he is one of the best rebounders ever for his position. 10%+ rebounding rate is an extremely unique skill. it allows him to be productive without touches and that's what I was looking for.
-as 31/32 y/old player he avged 2.3/2.4 steals per36. we don't know how his steals numbers would look like when he was younger but you can expect he was damn good.
-he's respectable enough shooter not to disrespect him like Rondo or KC Jones. during the 60s he shot 76.3 FT%. that's okay.
-I was looking for someone who could defend guards and give me some versatility/flexibility in that area. with Magic/Sloan/Pippen rotation on the perimeter, I can adjust my coverage each and every time.

I was considering couple of other guys as well, but it seemed like a dream-choice because of his defense, rebounding, versatility and production without usage.

[BlackIce]

Mm. I think a few teams are going to have spacing issues, curious to see how quickly 3 point shooters go in the next round. I was about to pick a certain king but went Ellis due to spacing. Hope it pays off.

[Miller4ever]

I concede your points. Its all going to come out in any writeups anyway and thats what I was alluding to. I also wondered if maybe you had soemthing else up your sleeve.
I apologise if you feel offended. I do like your team and I know that Thurmond (Who I have had 3 times on my team) will be able to dominate in some matchups and not in others. With KAJ you can easily move him to a PF type slot and let Thurmond guard Cs and use KAJ and his quickness. They can be a Wallacex2 type of duo no doubt. On my team Thurmond doesnt work but because you have KAJ who has more range it very well can. It also clears KAJ to not have to do teh dirty work.

I think a modern-day comparison for the duo I have is kind of like Tim Duncan and Dwight Howard, if Tim Duncan had a skyhook and Dwight thought he had a 14-footer. Both players have do PF/C and they offset each other with finesse and physicality.

[bastillon]

Warspite, mythbreaker, sabas revenge and the guy with Shaq have great teams. I wonder what has more value - perimeter scoring or post scoring - in these ATL competitions.

[Miller4ever]

^^It should be post scoring, in my opinion. It is widely recognized that the superior inside game wins. For all previous title winners, we're looking at very good bigs, from Pau/Bynum to Shaq to Duncan and the Wallaces all the way back to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

[BlackIce]

It should be defense, offensive efficiency, and balance. I happen to have a more perimeter oriented team but I don't think post scoring is the end all especially if their isn't spacing.

Also in regards to all those teams you mentioned they all had elite perimeter scoring. The 1st pair had Kobe, Shaq had Kobe and Wade, Sheed was a more perimeter oriented big and Ben wasn't a scoring post presence, not to mention Billups, Rip, etc. Kareem and Duncan are better examples but they had dangerous periemeter scoring with Magic, Ginobli, etc.

If anything looking at those teams you'll notice a post presence yes, but elite defense and balanced perimeter scorers usually with a closer on the wings.

[bastillon]

yup, if you look at title teams you'll notice a trend that perimeter scoring + interior defense matters. post players are nice to have but there were many teams who did just fine without it. KG's Celtics, Pistons, Bulls, Badboys, 70s Celtics, 60s Celtics, 70s Knicks, really even late Showtime - it's actually most of NBA champions that didn't have much of a post presence on offense. wow, I'm surprised by these results

[SabasRevenge!]

yup, if you look at title teams you'll notice a trend that perimeter scoring + interior defense matters. post players are nice to have but there were many teams who did just fine without it. KG's Celtics, Pistons, Bulls, Badboys, 70s Celtics, 60s Celtics, 70s Knicks, really even late Showtime - it's actually most of NBA champions that didn't have much of a post presence on offense. wow, I'm surprised by these results

Conversations like this are why I love these games...

[bastillon]

wow, Yao is a steal. one of the best defensive centers even in this competition (incredibly underrated) and still has nice little jumpshot out to 15-17 feet to be effective offensively. Yao is a weird player to me. he's incredibly overrated overall (can't stay healthy, apparently people don't consider that little fact as important), but for a 1 year peak he's a great player. what also bothers me is why everyone is talking about his post moves and everything when he's really a very limited offensive player because you can simply front him and he's done with scoring. defensively he's a monster - he stopped 31 y/old Shaq (16 PPG on bad efficiency) in the same year when he was dominating the Wallaces in the finals, his +/- impact defensively is also off-the-charts.

I'm gonna get bashed for saying this, but I think if we're talking 1 year peak, Yao is right up there with Lanier or Ewing, maybe little worse.

[CellarDoor]

^Defensively, I can't say you're wrong overall. I think Ewing and Lanier have a bit more defensive versatility, but overall prowess is close. I think Ewing/Lanier have a better chance of contributing well on offense though. Which may not be needed for whomever drafted Yao. (Didn't stop to check)

[Warspite]

The problem with Yao is mobility and pace. ATL teams move at a much faster pace than a current team does. You realy have to look at 1960s pace to find what an ATL team looks like. Yao can create mismatches but can also be mismatched. Its always interesting to see how hes used. Theres no doubt his a awsome change of pace C. IMHO Yao is like bringing in a knuckleball pitcher in relief of Randy Johnson or Roger Clemens.

[bastillon]

it's amazing how Stockton went in like 3rd round and KJ ~4 rounds later despite the fact that KJ was actually better during his peak and even dominated Stockton in one head-to-head playoff series. I'd agree that Stockton is maybe a better role player due his outside shooting, but how is that big enough difference to take him ~50 players later ?

[Warspite]

it's amazing how Stockton went in like 3rd round and KJ ~4 rounds later despite the fact that KJ was actually better during his peak and even dominated Stockton in one head-to-head playoff series. I'd agree that Stockton is maybe a better role player due his outside shooting, but how is that big enough difference to take him ~50 players later ?

historicaly this is one of the highest spots KJ has gone at. I have seen him go undrafted multiple times. Im a big fan of his personaly but he rarely fits my team.

[TMACFORMVP]

Yeah, KJ always gets underrated. Definitely one of my favorites, it's hard, because of his lack of three point shooting, BUT if you have the team around him, he's a big time steal.

[Bruh Man]

I believe KJ is the only player in NBA history to average 20 pts. 10 ast. 2 stl. in a season, that's pretty impressive.

[bastillon]

strange, especially -as you put it- when you're playing with extremely high pace here. Kevin Johnson is the best finisher at PG spot ever and Stockton isn't exactly great at it. I don't know if he's that much better transition passer either - KJ was also a great passer and averaged like ~12 APG during his peak.

besides, why do you think they'll be playing 60s pace ? at the time teams were incredibly dumb as far as tactics if you look at any game from that period, they were just trying to shoot as fast as they can, regardless of whether they can get a quality shot or not. I think 100 poss/game (GSW-like) is still very fast and if you're a fastbreaking team, you'll probably stick with that. this is also the pace teams were playing at in the late 80s. seems just about right.

not that I care, really. I'd rather play at extremely high pace and with 60s style bc I have great rebounders and there are gonna be many of them available if we're assuming they'll play like that. not to mention that my team is made for r'n'g. Dwight, Cowens and Pippen as finishers in transition with Magic leading ? that's unstoppable.

[Warspite]

strange, especially -as you put it- when you're playing with extremely high pace here. Kevin Johnson is the best finisher at PG spot ever and Stockton isn't exactly great at it. I don't know if he's that much better transition passer either - KJ was also a great passer and averaged like ~12 APG during his peak.

besides, why do you think they'll be playing 60s pace ? at the time teams were incredibly dumb as far as tactics if you look at any game from that period, they were just trying to shoot as fast as they can, regardless of whether they can get a quality shot or not. I think 100 poss/game (GSW-like) is still very fast and if you're a fastbreaking team, you'll probably stick with that. this is also the pace teams were playing at in the late 80s. seems just about right.

not that I care, really. I'd rather play at extremely high pace and with 60s style bc I have great rebounders and there are gonna be many of them available if we're assuming they'll play like that. not to mention that my team is made for r'n'g. Dwight, Cowens and Pippen as finishers in transition with Magic leading ? that's unstoppable.

2 Big factors drive up pace

1. The desire to negate the adv of HoF bigmen: Teams increased pace to counter Mikan and then Wilt/Russell. Its the desire for early offense before def bigs can set up that increases pace not fastbreaks.

2. Overall talent: Every coach would like to uptempo unles he has a great bigman. He doesnt because of talent. When you look at the most talented teams in NBA history you see a natural increase in pace. Bird/parish and McHlae are not fast break super athletic players but they played at a fast pace because they were very eff and forced other teams to run to keep up.
Its my contention that teams have so much more talent that they naturaly can increase pace w/o a huge increase in TOs. Not as fast as an allstar game but faster than a 80s team.

[bastillon]

1. The desire to negate the adv of HoF bigmen: Teams increased pace to counter Mikan and then Wilt/Russell. Its the desire for early offense before def bigs can set up that increases pace not fastbreaks.

a possibility, but I can't explain why they were taking inefficient shots anyway. if the idea was to get early offense to get a quality look, then why didn't they establish a better (smarter) offensive philosophy ? I don't get it.

2. Overall talent: Every coach would like to uptempo unles he has a great bigman. He doesnt because of talent. When you look at the most talented teams in NBA history you see a natural increase in pace. Bird/parish and McHlae are not fast break super athletic players but they played at a fast pace because they were very eff and forced other teams to run to keep up.

Celtics were playing at this pace just because the league was playing very fast overall. if you look at them in comparison to their peers, they're pretty average in terms of pace. what made them run a lot was in-era style which was fast, that's all.

I didn't see Bulls run a lot and they certainly had the opportunity to do so with Pippen and Michael.

[lorak]

it's amazing how Stockton went in like 3rd round and KJ ~4 rounds later despite the fact that KJ was actually better during his peak and even dominated Stockton in one head-to-head playoff series.

And Stockton dominated KJ in another one