Frontcourt vs. Backcourt Superstars

[Widowmaker2k]

So…the other day I was thinking about what exactly the criteria should be for an impact player. Not necessarily who puts up the best numbers, but what sorts of players actually contribute the most towards winning games. With all things being equal (talent, skill, etc.), who actually impacts a game more, a frontcourt superstar such as Tim Duncan or Shaquille O’Neal, or a backcourt superstar such as Kobe Bryant or Steve Nash? Another interesting way to look at is trying to qualify the GOAT (Greatest of All Time), many people will say Michael Jordan, but equally many would name a guy like Bill Russell or Wilt Chamberlain. And in some cases it gets even more confusing: take a player like Magic Johnson who could play well in both the frontcourt and the backcourt. (He was technically a point guard, but won finals MVP his rookie year playing center in place of injured Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.) Even our own Chris Webber was a big-man with some skills reminiscent of a point guard (passing, court-vision).

A superstar big man with an all-around talent can score at will, rebound, block shots, and generally clog the paint. On the flip side of the coin, a superstar guard with an all-around talent can cut open the defense with dribble penetration and other skills reliant on speed and quickness.

So…I guess you can go by the old adage of never trading Big for Small (or young for old), but if (knowing what you know now) on draft day would you take Emeka Okafor or Dwayne Wade? (Assuming they both happened to be in the same draft.) Yao Ming or Chris Paul?

 

[chrisnu]

I would build around a Chris Bosh more than a Dwyane Wade. It's easier to acquire a difference-maker in the backcourt than it is to find an elite center. For every Amare Stoudemire, there are three teams starting a Kendrick Perkins or Mark Blount.

 

[kyo2002]

What has the most impact? It's one word (at least for offense). KOBE.

What has most impact is defined by position and how well its played. There are two types of games: half court and full court. In full court a PG is great. In half court a C is great. Most games are played in half court unless everyone has a quick trigger (no one usually gets back on defense in these games).

Most impact is C. I've seen many games where one team has a true C and another just a subsitute guard. Offensive rebounds can make a huge impact. C is also more efficient (not talking about stats). A good PG can run a team. A good C can dominate a game. Slashers are a dime a dozen and hog more than impact a team positively especially when there's no three seconds in the key.

 

[acisking]

The answer to that simply lies in the fact that apart from the Jordan era, almost every championship team had a dominating front court player or tandem of players. Since Jordan retired, every championship team had either Tim Duncan or Shaquille O'Neal (with the lone exception of the Pistons team which still had the formidable Wallace combination). Before the Jordan era? Abdul-Jabbar, Russell, Chamberlain, Moses Malone, McHale, Mikan, and others manned the post for championship teams. Granted, these players were complemented with superb guards, but it is far more difficult to find a dominant team that won without an exceptional big than it is to find one without very talented backcourt players.

 

[Kings113]

Definitely the big man who is very effective down low.

Jordan and the 90s Bulls, Pistons late 80s-90/04 were definitely special. But other than them, it's always been the big man. Even with the 04 Pistons, as said, Rasheed/Ben up front were a great tandem that complemented eachother.

Kobe hasn't done well alone yet.

T-Mac alone or as the #1 guy hasn't worked out. I think Yao will start to be more of that from now on. At least on the same level as T-Mac.

AI did decent as the #1 guy. Best of course being in 2001, which had lots of good role-players, and quality chemistry, defense. But still didn't get a ring.

Vince Carter as #1 hasn't gotten far. Nets I think can legitimately get to the ECF, and an average chance at the finals this season. With normal health, VC will have the best team around him since 2001.

Wade became #1 in 05-06. But has Shaq as #2. In the playoffs in 06, especially finals, Shaq's presence allowed Wade to do a good deal of what he did. So a unique case.

LeBron had a pretty easy path to the finals. Including a lesser Detroit team in the ECF than people thought. Pretty poor chance Cleveland has a chance to get back to the finals, until they improve significantly, to keep pace with other top teams in the East. When LBJ gets consistent with his mid-range jumper, and has some more talent around him - watch out. I think because he's in the east, out of all the swingmen alone/#1 guys he'll have the best chance to win a title. Get to the finals the most.

Tim Duncan is and has been the best player in the league for awhile now. Except maybe 03-04, because of KG.

Duncan the most talented? No. Athleticism being the only seperation. Because he's been coasting during the regular season the last 4 years, not flashy, or in many commercials, he doesn't get more recognition and more MVP awards. That'd be nice, but doesn't really matter because of the playoffs success, and steps up his game there.

So…I guess you can go by the old adage of never trading Big for Small (or young for old), but if (knowing what you know now) on draft day would you take Emeka Okafor or Dwayne Wade? (Assuming they both happened to be in the same draft.)

Not that fair to compare Wade/Emeka. Because Emeka's great defensively and on the boards, and while he is effective and underrated offensively, is still developing there and not as impactful. I think he can be good offensively, down the line. Also has been on a much lesser team, and been hit hard by injuries twice. Has to be more healthy. Bobcats are only going to better from now on, though. Actually have each season in win-total, and now are in win-now mode with a legit shot for the playoffs.

Wade's simply been a lot better overall, being on the Heat and next to Shaq having a significant deal to do with that aside from himself.

Just different levels so far.

To start your team with, you'd go with Wade. Aside from that, depends on what you need.

Now if it's Wade vs. Duncan, Shaq, D-Rob, Hakeem. Think I'd go with the big man.

 

[mac]

In fantasy ball it's always better to pick a front court superstars. Either that or a point guard, but rarely the SG and SF. There are a lot more elite shooting guards than big men. I personally agree with the style of offense thing. Phoenix in the 05-06 season without amare still played extremely well, because of the run n gun style which is largely guard orientated (correct me if I'm wrong). Then you've got a whole new level of run n gun such as the WNBA phoenix mercury that just hauls up like 50 3s a game or something.

That said, I think backcourt superstars play a greater role, especially defensively. With many teams having backcourt stars, a team with a weaker backcourt will suffer tremendously. For example matching up kobe with ... well you get the idea.

On a random note, the spurs have way too much luck in drafting. Nba live is getting me real mad with the overratedness of ginobili and parker.

 

[Gargamel]

And in some cases it gets even more confusing: take a player like Magic Johnson who could play well in both the frontcourt and the backcourt. (He was technically a point guard, but won finals MVP his rookie year playing center in place of injured Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.)

Magic is one of those rarities who rewrote rules. He's equivalent to Barkley dominating the paint at 6'5" or Shaq being the only 330 pounder w/ huge athleticism.

He was a pure point guard (I don't know how people deny that), but he just happened to be 6'9" w/ a nice spin move and a hook w/ either hand. His skills and height took something away from even the greatest of defenders. If he got Dumars or DJ on the low block -> baby hook. If he got a slower PF type like X-man, he would spin off him for a layup. If he got Jordan sucked in very low (w/ aggressive leaning), he would pass it off and MJ would have a tougher time recovering for help D. A defensive SF like McKey, Rodman, Pippen, McMillan, etc was needed to guard him conventionally.

 

[bibbinator]

A good big > good small, almost always. There are a lot of guys tall enough to play back court spots. Some of them will have to turn up as the best because there is so much talent and somebody has to be best among them. Bigs are a lot more rare in the population and not as talented, on average, than smalls and more injury prone on top of it all. A Shaq or Duncan is a lot more valuable than a Kobe simply because they are so rare.

 

[Dave McNulla]

primarily, i go with a good big (center/power forward) - somebody who scores in the paint, step out a little (like the dream shake jump shots), a good passer, and helper on team D.

secondarily, i'd go with a good point guard - somebody who can score and dish and play enough D to not put too much pressure on the bigs.

third, i go with the slasher (small forward, shooting guard) - somebody who can penetrate often to set up others.