If you were to build around one player from the past 25

[IronMexican]

Past 25 draft classes to start a franchise, who would it be?

[Rip-Hamilton32]

lol is this for real?

[Showtime24 LAKERS]

Kobe Bryant, The G.O.A.T for sure!

[ShoogarBear]

From the past 25 years, I'd have to take either Magic, Duncan, or Bird. They are the plug-and-play dream teammates of the era.

What did you have to do to be Magic's teammate? Basically just play good defense, and then if you got open on offense, you knew you were going to get the ball. Same with Bird. Pretty easy to find players who can blend with them.

With Duncan, you have the added advantage that you build not only your offense, but also your defense around him. He'll do all the dirty work and doesn't really mind if he's not scoring. Who doesn't fit playing alongside Tim Duncan?

The problem with Jordan is, great as he was, you basically needed to have guys who didn't mind not seeing the ball for huge chunks of time, but had to be ready to hit shots when they sporadically came. That's not an easy role to play, and that;s why I think it took the Bulls a while to find the right mix with Jordan, while Bird, Duncan, and Magic were all champions within their second year.

I always thought that Allen Iverson would have been a much better player if Jordan had never existed, because then his blueprint would have been somebody like Isaiah or Nate Archibald.

[balli]

Detlef Schrempf.

[MavDynasty]

Dirk Nowitzki over those scrubs anyday, k thx bai

[JamStone]

I look at it two different ways. If we knew back then what we already know now, it's obviously a lot easier. In retrospect, I'd go in this order, top 5:

1. Jordan
2. Shaquille O'Neal
3. Tim Duncan
4. Hakeem Olajuwon
5. LeBron James

If you're talking about before knowing how the players would perform as NBA players and having to go with what you knew at the time they were still prospects, I'd go:

1. Shaquille O'Neal
2. Hakeem Olajuwon
3. LeBron James
4. Tim Duncan
5. David Robinson

By the way, I'm apparently a LeBron James hater.

[balli]

After MJ? Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem.



By the way, I'm apparently a LeBron James hater.
For what it's worth I only consider you to be an unjustifiable hater of Deron Williams.

[IronMexican]

From the past 25 years, I'd have to take either Magic, Duncan, or Bird. They are the plug-and-play dream teammates of the era.

What did you have to do to be Magic's teammate? Basically just play good defense, and then if you got open on offense, you knew you were going to get the ball. Same with Bird. Pretty easy to find players who can blend with them.

With Duncan, you have the added advantage that you build not only your offense, but also your defense around him. He'll do all the dirty work and doesn't really mind if he's not scoring. Who doesn't fit playing alongside Tim Duncan?

The problem with Jordan is, great as he was, you basically needed to have guys who didn't mind not seeing the ball for huge chunks of time, but had to be ready to hit shots when they sporadically came. That's not an easy role to play, and that;s why I think it took the Bulls a while to find the right mix with Jordan, while Bird, Duncan, and Magic were all champions within their second year.

I always thought that Allen Iverson would have been a much better player if Jordan had never existed, because then his blueprint would have been somebody like Isaiah or Nate Archibald.

I would probably pick Magic too.

[mavs>spurs2]

why does everyone put Hakeem before Duncan? Is it just because this is a spurs message board? Hakeem dominated both ends of the floor like never before seen. He's number 2 on the GOAT list for sure in my book

[IronMexican]

why does everyone put Hakeem before Duncan? Is it just because this is a spurs message board? Hakeem dominated both ends of the floor like never before seen. He's number 2 on the GOAT list for sure in my book

That just speaks volumes of that '84 Drafts. Top 3 PF, top 3 C, and the GOAT.

[JamStone]

I would probably pick Magic too.

That's because you and lakaluva are not very good at math.

[IronMexican]

That's because you and lakaluva are not very good at math.

that's why i didn't add him. but someone mentioned him, so i said i'd take him over any one of these guys.

[stretch]

By the way, I'm apparently a LeBron James hater.

lol, oversensitive

[JamStone]

versus obsessive

[KidCongo]

If you're talking about before knowing how the players would perform as NBA players and having to go with what you knew at the time they were still prospects, I'd go:

1. Shaquille O'Neal
2. Hakeem Olajuwon
3. LeBron James
4. Tim Duncan
5. David Robinson



I wonder who would be taken first if they were all out of high-school. Was Shaq full grown coming out of high school? or did he grow in college?

[Obstructed_View]

Sam Bowie.

[BlackSwordsMan]

duncan

[Dex]

Like others have said, Michael was a better player, but Duncan is a better teammate. You could build a team around him any number of ways, and he would bring everything, work hard, and still be satisfied. No off the court issues, no drama, no jealousy. Like Pop has stated before, "a coach's dream".

[tlongII]

This is a no-brainer. It's obviously Jordan. It pains me to say that since we passed on him the in the draft. He's the ultimate player and the ultimate leader.

[rj215]

I don't think you could go wrong with either Jordan or Duncan. They both led in different ways but they always set the tone for the team with their performance.

[baseline bum]

From the past 25 years, I'd have to take either Magic, Duncan, or Bird. They are the plug-and-play dream teammates of the era.

What did you have to do to be Magic's teammate? Basically just play good defense, and then if you got open on offense, you knew you were going to get the ball. Same with Bird. Pretty easy to find players who can blend with them.

With Duncan, you have the added advantage that you build not only your offense, but also your defense around him. He'll do all the dirty work and doesn't really mind if he's not scoring. Who doesn't fit playing alongside Tim Duncan?

The problem with Jordan is, great as he was, you basically needed to have guys who didn't mind not seeing the ball for huge chunks of time, but had to be ready to hit shots when they sporadically came. That's not an easy role to play, and that;s why I think it took the Bulls a while to find the right mix with Jordan, while Bird, Duncan, and Magic were all champions within their second year.

I always thought that Allen Iverson would have been a much better player if Jordan had never existed, because then his blueprint would have been somebody like Isaiah or Nate Archibald.

Bird, Magic, and Duncan all walked into situations in which they had HOF teammates. Bird had Archibald, McHale, and Parish on his team (Pistol Pete too, though only for that first year). Magic had Kareem. Tim had David. Jordan had nothing close to that level when he entered the league, and his teams were beat by Bird's Celtics in 86 and 87 and the Pistons of Isiah and Dumars from 88-90 (two of the greatest teams ever put together).

The Bulls success and status as a title contender came once Pippen started to hit his prime. I can't blame Jordan for not winning titles with Orlando Woolridge and Dave Corzine.

Jordan's my pick, and I wouldn't think twice about it.

[baseline bum]

I wonder who would be taken first if they were all out of high-school. Was Shaq full grown coming out of high school? or did he grow in college?

Stanley Roberts was the star at LSU for most of Shaq's career. Shaq was pretty skinny in high school.

If you were considering players after their senior year of high school, LeBron would almost unquestionably be the #1 pick (the only competition for him out of high school would probably be Kareem).

[bdictjames]

I dont know why any one in their right minds wouldn't pick Michael. He simply is the best.

[angelbelow]

Jordan

[Biggems]

why wasnt Sam Bowie, Benoit Benjamin, or Michael Olowokandi on that list? Their greatness is the stuff of legend.

[dallaskd]

probably MJ, but people forget how much of a beast Shaq once was.

[dallaskd]

and that's pathetic.

Shaq's Prime >>>>>>>>>> Duncan's Prime

[monosylab1k]

Jason Kidd:sombrero:

[monosylab1k]

Shaq's Prime >>>>>>>>>> Duncan's Prime

agreed, but I think I'd still rather build a team around Duncan due to intangibles. Shaq can destroy a team just as much as he can lead one.

[JamStone]

Bird, Magic, and Duncan all walked into situations in which they had HOF teammates. Bird had Archibald, McHale, and Parish on his team (Pistol Pete too, though only for that first year). Magic had Kareem. Tim had David. Jordan had nothing close to that level when he entered the league, and his teams were beat by Bird's Celtics in 86 and 87 and the Pistons of Isiah and Dumars from 88-90 (two of the greatest teams ever put together).

The Bulls success and status as a title contender came once Pippen started to hit his prime. I can't blame Jordan for not winning titles with Orlando Woolridge and Dave Corzine.

Jordan's my pick, and I wouldn't think twice about it.

Bird didn't walk into a situation with Parish and McHale. They weren't on the team his rookie year. And, the one year Maravich played with Bird, he played less than half the season and was done. The Celtics won 29 games the year before Bird's rookie season.

[mavs>spurs2]

Seriously only 5 votes for Hakeem? Russel-esque on defense, with no other big men even coming close to comparing to him on offense. Led his team to 2 rings and could have led a dynasty had he had better teammates for the duration of his career. Most overlooked superstar in NBA history because he was just a soft spoken foreigner.

[monosylab1k]

Led his team to 2 rings

No Jordan.

And not to take away more from them, because they did win it all, but everyone knows the Knicks were the superior team and Ewing choked that series away. Starks too.

[baseline bum]

Bird didn't walk into a situation with Parish and McHale. They weren't on the team his rookie year. And, the one year Maravich played with Bird, he played less than half the season and was done. The Celtics won 29 games the year before Bird's rookie season.

OK, so he had McHale and Parish his second year, and Archibald his first two years plus Dave Cowens his first. Either year kills what Jordan had around him early in his career.

[lefty]

Where the fuck are Larry Bird and Magic?
And Kareem?

And Oscar?

[IronMexican]

Where the fuck are Larry Bird and Magic?
And Kareem?

And Oscar?

past 25 draft classes? was it that hard to read? let me try and bold the original post.

[lefty]

past 25 draft classes? was it that hard to read? let me try and bold the original post.

I know it's the past 25 draft classes...

But Shaq? really ? wtf?

Even if he comes the past 25, I don't GAF, Shaq is an overrated piece of shit

[Slippy]

Magic if we talking the last 30. Probably Timmy OR Dave

[Reggie Miller]

agreed, but I think I'd still rather build a team around Duncan due to intangibles. Shaq can destroy a team just as much as he can lead one.

Yep.

Last 25 years: Tim Duncan.

My Lifetime: Magic Johnson

All-Time: Oscar Robertson*


* Otherwise known as the TRUE GOAT.

If this were a question of pure talent or athleticism, my answers might differ, but these are the guys you can "plug and play" with anyone, as ShoogarBear mentioned.

[mavs>spurs2]

pretty lame to pick tim freakin duncan over MJ, magic is almost understandable

[bobbyjoe]

It's MJ.

Everyone else is fighting for 2nd. Picking anyone over MJ is unbelieveable.

[Cloud786]

MJ or Hakeem.

[urunobili]

Robinson...

[ambchang]

David Robinson being on this list is stupid. He had proven beyond a doubt that he wasn't good enough to build a championship team around him, but he did prove that he was an excellent complementary piece. No shame in that whatsoever, but he still doesn't even merit consideration here.

He should have pulled an Hakeem, demand a trade to get FO's ass in gear to get him better teammates, or he should have just jumped from one team to the next like Shaq.

[stretch]

versus obsessive

lol crybaby

[bobbyjoe]

David Robinson being on this list is stupid. He had proven beyond a doubt that he wasn't good enough to build a championship team around him, but he did prove that he was an excellent complementary piece. No shame in that whatsoever, but he still doesn't even merit consideration here.

It's the homerism. Many honestly believe Robinson was on par with O'Neal and Olajuwon.

Robinson isn't in this discussion at all.

Your analysis is spot on: Robinson was a great complementary piece, not the kind of player you build around. He's the one name that makes no sense on this list. This is about true studs, not 2nd banana's.

[Reggie Miller]

It's MJ.

Everyone else is fighting for 2nd. Picking anyone over MJ is unbelieveable.

The disparity of talent between big men is much more significant than the disparity of guard talent. In other words, there aren't enough quality players 6'10" and over to go around.

Historically, you would be much better off to pick Duncan over Jordan, because the NBA has traditionally been a center's league. However, Jordan is directly or indirectly responsible for a lot of rule changes and emphases designed to facilitate guard play.

Basketball doesn't really use the replacement player concept, but let's look at it this way. In general, an "average" player is a pretty valuable commodity, because an "average" player is considerably better than the players at the bottom of the ladder (who are pulling down the average, so to speak). At the same time, the "average" player is nowhere near the level of a truly elite player like a Jordan, Robinson, Duncan, Bryant, etc.

The talent in the league is pyramidal. That is, there is a "base" of replacement level players. Think about it. On most NBA teams, roster spots 8-12 go to guys who are barely hanging on, desperately hoping for another contract. The next level are the mediocre to average players. These guys may or may not start, but they will generally have a decent career (longer than a rookie contract). Obviously, they are fewer in number, as are the players at the next level, the "All Stars." These are the guys that will likely start for their entire career, even when they no longer should. Finally, you have the truly elite players ("Perennial All Stars"). Most teams are lucky to have even one elite player.

This has a profound effect on a game like basketball (as opposed to say, baseball), because the positions demand a certain minimum height to be competitive. Obviously, the most awesome player in the world can't post up a center over a foot taller, so long as that center is at least competent. Therefore, the talent pool for each position is considerably different.

On a global scale, the average for male height is slightly above 5'6," and in the U.S. the male average is 5'10" for non-Hispanics (averages out to 5'9" overall). Not surprisingly, approximately 14% of men in the US are at least six feet tall. However, only 3.9% of the US male population is at least 6'2" tall. Less than 2% of the world's population is at least 6'4," and the number becomes infitessimally small as we approach 7'2."

Since it is impossible to guesstimate this incredibly small percentage, let's look at this concrete example. "For the 2003-04 season, nineteen players who were at least seven feet tall played substantial minutes in the NBA. Of these, nine, or 47 percent, were born in a country other than the United States." See The Short Supply of Tall People: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa5437/is_200512/ai_n21384764/pg_4?tag=artBody;col1

This makes an elite center (or even power forward) exponentially more valuable, because the pyramidal distribution of talent is even more extreme. First, the replacement pool of players is extremely small. Therefore, the "base" level of the pyramid is quite "wide" compared to the "pinnacle," but it is tiny in the absolute sense. In practical terms, this means that the disparity of actual basketball talent amongst men 6’10” and over is considerable. Common sense and your own observations should back this up. Does any position other than center suffer from the “Big White Stiff” phenomenon?

Restated, Jordan’s value over a replacement level shooting guard is not nearly as great as the value of an elite center like Russell, Chamberlain, Hakeem, or Robinson over a “Big White Stiff.”