Greatest frontcourt and backcourt ever? [Archive]

stretch

06-23-2009, 09:54 AM

The other day, I was watching something on the Celtics, and someone in the show said that they had the greatest frontcourt ever (Bird, McHale, Parish). It made me think of other great frontcourts as well as backcourts. Who's frontcourt and backcourt would you pair together to form the most unstoppable team?

I would put the Spurs frontline of Elliott, Duncan, Robinson with the Pistons backcourt of Dumars and Thomas.

Fucking beastly defensive team, with an explosive guard that facilitates the offense as well as anyone (Thomas), a lockdown defender that can also score efficiently and hit 3s (Dumars), a smart and well rounded role player who can score 20 any given night (Elliott), the best PF ever who dominates on both ends, as well as having a dominant low-post game (Duncan), and a center who has everything you need... size, strength, athleticism, shotblocking, rebounding, smarts, scoring inside, a short jumper to keep defenses more on their toes (Robinson).

and the best thing, aside from the PG (who is SUPPOSED to have the ball the majority of the time), no one constantly needs the ball in their hands to be effective.

thoughts? any other dominant frontcourts and backcourts that come to mind?

sonic21

06-23-2009, 10:08 AM

Walt Frazier & Earl Monroe
Jerry West & Gail Goodrich

sonic21

06-23-2009, 10:09 AM

nice choice by the way

z0sa

06-23-2009, 10:25 AM

i love elliott and he was a very fine player, but he just doesn't compare with Bird. McHale and Parrish more than compare with Timmy and DRob.

Dr. Gonzo

06-23-2009, 10:27 AM

Bynum, Gasol, Ariza

LnGrrrR

06-23-2009, 10:31 AM

I'll take the aforementioned frontcourt, and Jordan and Pippen if you let me use Pippen as a guard.

Other possible frontcourt candidates: Havlicek/Heinsohn/Russell, Dr J/Moses Malone/Barkley, D. Robinson/T. Duncan/Any other guy, Drexler/Barkley/Hakeem

Tough to say with backcourt candidates... not very many legendary PG/SG combos it seems, besides the aforementioned Dumars/Thomas. Billups and Hamilton aren't bad either as a combo.

LnGrrrR

06-23-2009, 10:35 AM

Parker and Ginobili actually have a very strong arguement for strongest backcourt ever.

Honestly, I haven't checked the stats, but you might be right. Strange how frontcourts can be packed, but most teams seem to have had only one star at a time in the backcourt.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 10:36 AM

The 80s Celtics had the most ridiculous frontcourt ever, can't really argue with that one.
The Wallace, Wallace and Prince Pistons frontcourt was actually quite strong. Doesn't have the names of the other two you mentioned, but they compliment each other very well, and is amazing defensively as well.
Moses Malone, Dr. J & Bobby Jones/Barkley was great too even though none of them were in their absolute primes other than Malone.

As for backcourt, Magic and Norm Nixon was a great pair, but Magic and Scott was even better.

Payton and Hawkins was pretty good, Stockton and Hornacek/Jeff Malone, Rolando Blackman/Fat Lever were some great backcourts as well. Not as great as those mentioned above, but great nonetheless.

z0sa

06-23-2009, 10:52 AM

but most teams seem to have had only one star at a time in the backcourt.

I think it has more to do with dominating the ball. Imagine Nash and MJ on the same team for example. Yeah, its great on paper, but a guy like Nash needs the ball too much for MJ to be MJ. You can switch the two, and/or insert pretty much any two truly dominant backcourt players at different positions for the same results.

There's exceptions to every rule, but I think premiere perimeter players generally need the ball in their hand to be most comfortable, while a frontcourt can be packed with talented players who want little time with the ball in their hands except when primed for scoring opportunities.

stretch

06-23-2009, 10:59 AM

i love elliott and he was a very fine player, but he just doesn't compare with Bird. McHale and Parrish more than compare with Timmy and DRob.

mchale and parrish = overrated

the celtics line could score points, but couldnt shut anyone down. the spurs front line can score points, and can also completely shut people down.

z0sa

06-23-2009, 11:00 AM

mchale and parrish = overrated

the celtics line could score points, but couldnt shut anyone down. the spurs front line can score points, and can also completely shut people down.

oh, I agree Tim and DRob > Mchale/parrish, just its not the no-contest elliott vs bird would be. Elliott was strong both offensively and defensively, but Bird was just way stronger in every facet of the game.

Which is why its very hard to include the 99 spurs frontcourt. Tim and DRob wouldn't bring a whole lot more, statistically, to the table than McHale and Parrish. Bird and Elliott, well there's nowhere to begin. Bird is a true all-time great, Elliott is one of an era's many all-stars.

dirk4mvp

06-23-2009, 11:02 AM

Imagine Nash and MJ on the same team for example.

Nash would change the way he plays and become the best spot up shooter of all time.

stretch

06-23-2009, 11:09 AM

oh, I agree Tim and DRob > Mchale/parrish, just its not the no-contest elliott vs bird would be. Elliott was strong both offensively and defensively, but Bird was just way stronger in every facet of the game.

not on defense

which is my issue with the entire front line of the Celtics when compared to the Spurs.

both front lines can score points pretty efficiently, almost at will. but only the spurs front line can be counted on to shut down opposing teams offenses (and any style of offense at that) on a nightly basis.

stretch

06-23-2009, 11:12 AM

Nash would change the way he plays and become the best spot up shooter of all time.

OMG nash would average 20 ppg just on open jumpshots alone beacuse of jordan

nash is the best jumpshooter ive ever seen. there isnt a single type of jumper he cant hit. runner. hand in face. pull-up. spot-up. fading left/right/back. off balance. short. mid-range. 3 pointer. he hits everything.

z0sa

06-23-2009, 11:15 AM

not on defense

in a 3v3 with bird/mchale/parrish with drob/tim/elliott, bird scores as many points as he wants ... and I think he could stop elliott just fine. If Parrish could keep DRob at bay, Tim is the only one who sets up a torture chamber on offense against that team... its a tough decision is all I'm saying.

LnGrrrR

06-23-2009, 11:22 AM

Bird played strong defense... I don't know where you're getting the idea that he couldn't from.

Rip-Hamilton32

06-23-2009, 11:23 AM

Billups/Hamilton :elephant

z0sa

06-23-2009, 11:26 AM

Bird played strong defense... I don't know where you're getting the idea that he couldn't from.

Being young, I didn't get to watch him play live, but from the many games I've seen up to now, he has always struck me as a very intelligent defender, either helping or defending. Never in the wrong spot, always with a hand in the face, great on the defensive boards.

DUNCANownsKOBE2

06-23-2009, 11:40 AM

Bill Sharman and Bob Cousy from the 1950s Celtics might be the only backcourt with better combinded stats.

That team's backcourt was particularily good when they had Sharman, Cousy, Sam Jones and KC Jones.

urunobili

06-23-2009, 11:41 AM

Shaq, Fox, Horry

LeBronMVPjames

06-23-2009, 11:44 AM

how bout the Denver Nuggets: Billups/jr smith/melo

DUNCANownsKOBE2

06-23-2009, 11:48 AM

And honestly the best backcourt I can think of is Monroe and Frazier as mentioned earlier.....LnGrrrR makes a great point about not seeing a frequent amount of stud PG's and SG's paired together.

JamStone

06-23-2009, 11:56 AM

Frazier/Monroe

Hakeem/Barkley/Drexler (96-97) - they didn't win a championship and all three had already started their decline, but they were still a great front court that just couldn't put it together enough to get past the Jazz. Still had explosive scoring and Hakeem was still a great, though not as dominant, defender. They combined for 60 ppg, 29 rpg, and 13 apg. Health was obviously a concern though.

DUNCANownsKOBE2

06-23-2009, 12:00 PM

Yeah Jamstone I forgot about them.....it's not their fault they couldn't get past Utah, Matt Maloney just got eaten alive by Stockton.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 12:20 PM

not on defense

which is my issue with the entire front line of the Celtics when compared to the Spurs.

both front lines can score points pretty efficiently, almost at will. but only the spurs front line can be counted on to shut down opposing teams offenses (and any style of offense at that) on a nightly basis.

McHale was actually an excellent defender.

stretch

06-23-2009, 12:57 PM

McHale was actually an excellent defender.

meh, compared to timmy? average. timmy can anchor the middle much better than mchale.

stretch

06-23-2009, 12:59 PM

Bird played strong defense... I don't know where you're getting the idea that he couldn't from.

fuck no he didnt

he got some steals, but other than that, he often got facefucked by his opponent.

JamStone

06-23-2009, 01:00 PM

McHale was a very good defender for the 80s where PFs were nowhere near as athletic or agile as they have become these days. Even Charles Oakley was a very good PF defender. But, neither of those two guys have the foot speed or lateral quickness required to defend a power forward in today's NBA.

stretch

06-23-2009, 01:15 PM

I retract. McHale was excellent. He played in the 80's, which means he was a great TEAM defender, thus he could most definitely combat any great PF and keep them from scoring. It doesn't matter that he isn't physically comparable to some players, the fact that he played in the 80s (the golden era of basketball) and played great TEAM defense automatically means he is as good, if not a better defender and basketball player than Tim Duncan.

poop

06-23-2009, 01:15 PM

98-2000 Robinson/Duncan would RAPE Parish/Mchale....give me a break. hell Bynum/Gasol/Odom would give serious troubles to the 80' celtics frontline

ambchang

06-23-2009, 01:33 PM

Charles Oakley was a great defender all the way up to the 90s.
Even in today's NBA, a player like Kurt Thomas, who definitely is slow, can be a very effective defender.

For stretch, who ever said that McHale was better than Duncan on defense? He was just an excellent defender, someone who made the All-D team 6 times (3 1st, 3 2nd). He had a huge wingspan, had decent foot speed, very intelligent in his position defense, and was effective one on one. He is the guy who would guard the Malones, Ewings and Olajuwons.

stretch

06-23-2009, 01:36 PM

For stretch, who ever said that McHale was better than Duncan on defense? He was just an excellent defender, someone who made the All-D team 6 times (3 1st, 3 2nd). He had a huge wingspan, had decent foot speed, very intelligent in his position defense, and was effective one on one. He is the guy who would guard the Malones, Ewings and Olajuwons.

he played great TEAM defense!

mchale > timmy

JamStone

06-23-2009, 01:41 PM

Charles Oakley was a great defender all the way up to the 90s.
Even in today's NBA, a player like Kurt Thomas, who definitely is slow, can be a very effective defender.

Two quite different things to say a player is an excellent defender and saying he can be a very effective (team) defender.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 02:21 PM

Two quite different things to say a player is an excellent defender and saying he can be a very effective (team) defender.

Charles Oakley was a great team defender and a tough 1-1 defender.
Same with Kurt Thomas.

They probably weren't Duncan good, but players can make up for their lack of speed with positioning and smarts, even in 1-1 situations.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 02:22 PM

he played great TEAM defense!

mchale > timmy

McHale also played great 1-1 defense.

JamStone

06-23-2009, 02:22 PM

I repeat with slight variation, two different things to say a player is an EXCELLENT defender and saying he's a "tough" 1-1 defender.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 02:50 PM

Tim Duncan is an excellent defender, yet he isn't that athletic (since 2005 or so)

LnGrrrR

06-23-2009, 02:52 PM

Is Larry Bird on the level of Tim Duncan? No, of course not. But he wasn't a horrible defender. You're making him sound like he was Steve Nash.

JamStone

06-23-2009, 02:56 PM

Tim Duncan is no longer an excellent defender, especially since he's lost a step and some athleticism with all of his knee and foot problems. When he was younger, he was very athletic and that's when he was an excellent defender. Now, he doesn't have the foot speed or athleticism to effectively defend the better power forwards in the league. He often has to end up defending slower, less athletic centers. Duncan is still a very good and smart defender. He's no longer an excellent defender and that's primarily because he lacks the athleticism he used to have.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 03:25 PM

ffadicted

06-23-2009, 03:38 PM

Parker & Ginobili
Elliott, Duncan & Robinson

There was surprisingly only about 5% homerism in those choices if a 100% ginobili is considered.

JamStone

06-23-2009, 03:56 PM

Depends how you defined excellent, I guess this is much more a matter of definitions and semantics. While I agree that Duncan wasn't the defender he was primarily because he lost his athleticism, he is still better than most, if not all, big man today on the defensive end despite his limited agility and speed. If Duncan does not qualify as an excellent defender, I suppose the only big man you can put there the past season would be Dwight Howard, who I generally think is overrated defensively because he still does not have the smarts.

McHale in his prime would definitely rank similar to Duncan of 09 in terms of defensive abilities. Of course, he is a long way away from the 99 Duncan, which was the original argument.

In the last two seasons, Duncan has gotten lit up by opposing post players more than in his first 8 seasons in the league. He is not an "excellent" defender anymore. He's a very smart defender. He's still a very good team defender. And, Pop's defensive schemes allow him to be effective. But, by no means is Tim Duncan still an "excellent" defender anymore. Not currently. Not with those knees. Not with the decline in athleticism and mobility. And absolutely not for a power forward in today's game.

It's not a matter of semantics when the descriptions are clear. "Excellent" versus "tough" or "very good" or "effective." There is a clear enough distinction.

stretch

06-23-2009, 04:23 PM

Parker & Ginobili
Elliott, Duncan & Robinson

There was surprisingly only about 5% homerism in those choices if a 100% ginobili is considered.

honestly, i can't really disagree too much, although i still would rather have Isaiah and Dumars.

but a fully healthy parker/ginobili duo is one of the best we've seen.

ambchang

06-23-2009, 04:39 PM

In the last two seasons, Duncan has gotten lit up by opposing post players more than in his first 8 seasons in the league. He is not an "excellent" defender anymore. He's a very smart defender. He's still a very good team defender. And, Pop's defensive schemes allow him to be effective. But, by no means is Tim Duncan still an "excellent" defender anymore. Not currently. Not with those knees. Not with the decline in athleticism and mobility. And absolutely not for a power forward in today's game.

It's not a matter of semantics when the descriptions are clear. "Excellent" versus "tough" or "very good" or "effective." There is a clear enough distinction.

So you would say that there are no excellent defensive bigs in the league right now?

JamStone

06-23-2009, 04:46 PM

Dwight Howard. And, I'd probably stop right there. And even with him, I'd hesitate to call him excellent. And, now that we don't know how KG will be affected by his injuries, I wouldn't include him. But, yeah, probably no other ones right now, not currently.

But, just four years ago, there were several "excellent" big man defenders: Duncan, KG, Ben Wallace, Rasheed Wallace. The younger bigs who are stars need to improve their defense.