Top Trios In The NBA

[duncan228]

Top Trios In The NBA (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html)
SI.com

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x282/duncan228/lead/lead629.jpg

6. San Antonio Spurs
Tim Duncan, Tony Parker and Manu Ginobili

Before the Heat, there were the Celtics. And before the Celtics, there were the Spurs, who used the trio of Duncan-Parker-Ginobili to win three NBA titles. Although an influx of youth has helped steady San Antonio's ship, the Spurs still revolve around their version of the Big Three.

*********************

The rest of the list. Hit the link for the write-ups.

1. Miami Heat
LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh

2. Los Angeles Lakers
Lamar Odom, Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol

3. Boston Celtics
Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Rajon Rondo

4. Atlanta Hawks
Al Horford, Josh Smith and Joe Johnson

5. Oklahoma City Thunder
Jeff Green, Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook

7. Chicago Bulls
Joakim Noah, Derrick Rose and Carlos Boozer

8. Orlando Magic
Jameer Nelson, Vince Carter and Dwight Howard

9. Dallas Mavericks
Dirk Nowitzki, Jason Terry and Jason Kidd

10. Utah Jazz
Deron Williams, Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson

11. Portland Trailblazers
Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge and Nicholas Batum

12. Milwaukee Bucks
John Salmons, Brandon Jennings, Andrew Bogut

13. Memphis Grizzlies
Marc Gasol, OJ Mayo and Rudy Gay

14. New Orleans Hornets
David West, Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html

[DesignatedT]

:lmao @ okc and atlanta being ahead of us. fucking terrible.

[timtonymanu]

No way in hell that Atlanta and OKC have better big 3's than us. OKC is more just Durant and Westbrook and Atlanta? What the hell have they done to be ahead of us? Pathetic list.

[Leetonidas]

Yeah, Atlanta and OKC ahead of the Big Three is laughable. Hell, our Big Three may be better than Boston's. A healthy Tim is better than a healthy KG and Manu at full health is better than Pierce at full health, now anyway. Rondo is their only better player in their 3.

[WildcardManu]

I didn't know every team had a Big 3. Only valid Big 3's I see in the league are in San Antonio, Boston and Miami and probably L.A. Miami is doubtful because they've yet to win it all.

[Leetonidas]

LA definitely has a big three, well kinda. It's more like a big 2.5. If Bynum were completely healthy and in shape they would have a big three

[HarlemHeat37]

LA easily has a big 3 with the way Odom is currently playing, he's by far their 3rd best player..

The Spurs behind Atlanta and OKC is definitely questionable though..

[Janko]

3. Boston Celtics
Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett, Rajon Rondo (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html)

lol allen :lol

[L.I.T]

I can almost see the argument for OKC trio ahead of the Spurs trio right now.

Cannot see at all how the Hawks threesome can be ranked ahead of the Spurs Big 3.

[HarlemHeat37]

Durant/Westbrook, I can definitely see, but Jeff Green brings them down a few notches..

[ChuckD]

I can almost see the argument for OKC trio ahead of the Spurs trio right now.

Cannot see at all how the Hawks threesome can be ranked ahead of the Spurs Big 3.

No. Jeff Green is horrible. He's like a black version of Bonner, but substitute long TWOS instead of threes. In addition, they are 10 points per 100 possessions WORSE on defense with him in the game. They had to pull him and play Ibaka to win in Portland. Aldridge was raping him, but Ibaka shut Aldridge down cold. There's a reason OKC didn't extend Green.

[TD 21]

The Spurs should be third or fourth. The Hawks and the Thunder have no business being placed ahead of them.

[ALVAREZ6]

LOL



The Spurs 'bout ta turn em inta quittas

[AussieFanKurt]

lol another shithouse list

[AFBlue]

What a joke...

First, Lakers should be the top trio because they've actually proven something and are not just a conglomoration of talent.

Second, Atlanta/OKC...really? Al Horford is a nice young player, Smith fills the stat sheet and JJ is dependable...but none of those players are all-NBA (something all other teams have at least one of. And OKC being on there without a dependable big man is a joke. There's no written rule that a trio has to have a big, but what was the last team to win without one?

Lastly, I could critique every submittal on this list behind the Spurs, but that would take too much time.

Spurs should be top 3 based on talent and proof that they've actually accomplished something together. But the whole list is worthless.

[xamila rey]

lol @ the pix

[DJB]

Top Trios In The NBA (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html)
SI.com

7. Chicago Bulls
Joakim Noah, Derrick Rose and Carlos Boozer


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html

How exactly can a trio be rated if they haven't even played together?

[ALVAREZ6]

TD+TP+MANU = better than everyone else

[AFBlue]

How exactly can a trio be rated if they haven't even played together?

And the #1 trio has played together for two weeks.

/list

[UnWantedTheory]

I suppose the term "Big 3" has been re-defined. I guess every team in the NBA has a "Big 3"....whether the 3 they are referring to are actually "Big" or not. Three decent players, or one very good player and two decent players(vice versa), does not equate to a "Big 3"...IMO. Once again, homerism and the media rule most common thought. How dare we have common sense....

Dont forget what your thinking before they tell you what it was.

[L.I.T]

No. Jeff Green is horrible. He's like a black version of Bonner, but substitute long TWOS instead of threes. In addition, they are 10 points per 100 possessions WORSE on defense with him in the game. They had to pull him and play Ibaka to win in Portland. Aldridge was raping him, but Ibaka shut Aldridge down cold. There's a reason OKC didn't extend Green.

Like I said, almost.

Green is a solid player, but a Big 3 he does not make. Westbrook is looking like one of the top PGs in the league now and KD is 1A/1B with LBJ at SF. Unless you consider LBJ a PG, in which case KD is tops.

At this juncture I can almost see the argument for ranking the OKC guys ahead just on the strength of KD and RW. Meaning, I can understand where someone might make that argument. But I don't agree with it. Nor was I agreeing with it earlier.

The Spurs Big 3 is ahead of them, at the moment. And that much further ahead when you consider history, clutchness and potential to win a championship at the end of the season.

[mingus]

Boston over the last couple of years has done a better job of surrounding their big three with good players. Perkins and Rondo are better than RJ and Splitter. But if it's a game of 3 on 3 I'm going with Spurs big 3 no questions asked. They're second to LA and that's it.

[romain.star]

Wow... shitty list indeed

1. Lakers
2. Heat
3. Cs and Spurs
5. Bulls
6. Hawks
7. Jazz
8. Thunders
9. Hornets
10. Blazers

[pookenstein]

:lmao@ OKC and ATL beeing ahead of us. And how can it be "Big 3" if one of the players has yet to play a game in the Bulls uniform?
Pathetic.

[Dalamar_the_Dark]

Utah at number 10? You gotta be kidding me. Ahead of CP3 at 14? OMG.

But the worst has got to be Chicago at 7. LMAO.

[sa_butta]

Hornets are way to low, and what are the Bucks doing above them??
This is all kinds of wrong.

[Darkwaters]

Sports Illustrated, leading the way with quality analysis.

[dunkman]

1. The Celtics have best big 3 and they are proven. They actually have a big 4. Duncan is better than KG, but Pierce has always been better than Manu.

2. Kobe, Gasol and Odom are very impressive and succesful. However, Kobe is highly over-rated and Odom never made an all-nba team. KG, Pierce, Rondo and Alled did that many times. The Celtics had bad luck last season, they were clearly the better team. With Artest and Bynum, the Lakers have some of best big 4 and big 5 teams in the NBA. But they are vulnerable at PG and they can't put their best 5 players at the same time.

3. The Spurs big 3 had won more championships than any other present big 3 players, however the last championship was in 2007. The FO has struggled to bring complementary players, and there have been health problems. Defense has slipped since the Bowen retired (many would say the Spurs were big 4 team with him). The Spurs still didn't found a wing defender, however this year the roster looks excellent. At this point, Duncan isn't better by much than Gasol. Kobe is much better than either Manu or Parker, and Odom isn't much worse than either Manu or Parker.

4. On paper, LeBron, Wade and Bosh are the best, but they haven't proved anything. They will be great at some point, but they may struggle at C and PG positions. I mention them because LeBron is like Malone that can also pass, dribble, shot from anywhere, jump and move with amazing speed, Wade can play at MJ level in the playoffs and Bosh is a legit franchise player.

From there few other teams have big 3's (most have only 1 or 2 great players) but they still didn't achieve anything.

[romain.star]

1. The Celtics have best big 3 and they are proven. They actually have a big 4. Duncan is better than KG, but Pierce has always been better than Manu.

2. Kobe, Gasol and Odom are very impressive and succesful. However, Kobe is highly over-rated and Odom never made an all-nba team. KG, Pierce, Rondo and Alled did that many times. The Celtics had bad luck last season, they were clearly the better team. With Artest and Bynum, the Lakers have some of best big 4 and big 5 teams in the NBA. But they are vulnerable at PG and they can't put their best 5 players at the same time.

3. The Spurs big 3 had won more championships than any other present big 3 players, however the last championship was in 2007. The FO has struggled to bring complementary players, and there have been health problems. Defense has slipped since the Bowen retired (many would say the Spurs were big 4 team with him). The Spurs still didn't found a wing defender, however this year the roster looks excellent. At this point, Duncan isn't better by much than Gasol. Kobe is much better than either Manu or Parker, and Odom isn't much worse than either Manu or Parker.

4. On paper, LeBron, Wade and Bosh are the best, but they haven't proved anything. They will be great at some point, but they may struggle at C and PG positions. I mention them because LeBron is like Malone that can also pass, dribble, shot from anywhere, jump and move with amazing speed, Wade can play at MJ level in the playoffs and Bosh is a legit franchise player.

From there few other teams have big 3's (most have only 1 or 2 great players) but they still didn't achieve anything.

IMHO, Lakers B3 > Cs B3

[GSH]

What, now everybody has a Big 3? Why do any of you care how they have the teams ranked. It's a stupid, pointless article. Take the best three players on every team, and call them Big 3. The term was way overused already, with people debating whether some teams have a Big 4, etc. This article just carries that to the extreme.

The Spurs had (still have) three players who were good enough to carry a team by themselves. And they proved that whenever there were injuries. The Heat? Bosh is a good player, but not enough to carry a team by himself. The Lakers? That's a Big 2. Lamar Odom on any other team wouldn't be a rock star, by any means. Joakim Noah? Joakim F'ing Noah? Seriously?

I could go on - but I won't. It doesn't deserve that much attention.

[hater]

wow do these motherfuckers realize our big 3 has been consistently winning 50+ games for years with players like Bonner, 2009 RJ, RMJ, Bogans playing major minutes???

[romain.star]

What, now everybody has a Big 3? Why do any of you care how they have the teams ranked. It's a stupid, pointless article. Take the best three players on every team, and call them Big 3. The term was way overused already, with people debating whether some teams have a Big 4, etc. This article just carries that to the extreme.

The Spurs had (still have) three players who were good enough to carry a team by themselves. And they proved that whenever there were injuries. The Heat? Bosh is a good player, but not enough to carry a team by himself. The Lakers? That's a Big 2. Lamar Odom on any other team wouldn't be a rock star, by any means. Joakim Noah? Joakim F'ing Noah? Seriously?

I could go on - but I won't. It doesn't deserve that much attention.

Hey homer, if you think that Parker and Manu can carry a team by themselves (i disagree on that), Bosh sure can do it too...

[romain.star]

What, now everybody has a Big 3? Why do any of you care how they have the teams ranked. It's a stupid, pointless article. Take the best three players on every team, and call them Big 3. The term was way overused already, with people debating whether some teams have a Big 4, etc. This article just carries that to the extreme.

The Spurs had (still have) three players who were good enough to carry a team by themselves. And they proved that whenever there were injuries. The Heat? Bosh is a good player, but not enough to carry a team by himself. The Lakers? That's a Big 2. Lamar Odom on any other team wouldn't be a rock star, by any means. Joakim Noah? Joakim F'ing Noah? Seriously?

I could go on - but I won't. It doesn't deserve that much attention.

[cheguevara]

Hey homer, if you think that Parker and Manu can carry a team by themselves (i disagree on that), Bosh sure can do it too...

Bosch can carry a team? to what? failure?

[Brazil]

:lmao @ okc and atlanta being ahead of us. fucking terrible.

there is much worst than that !!!! :lmao@ atl being ahead of our big 3

[GSH]

Hey homer, if you think that Parker and Manu can carry a team by themselves (i disagree on that), Bosh sure can do it too...

Look, no player can carry a team to a championship by himself. LeBron is living proof of that. My point was that those three guys were capable of being the certerpiece of a team. Especially at their primes, when the Big 3 label was given to them.

When Manu was hobbled by his ankle, and Tim by his knee, Tony did one hell of a job of carrying the team. Manu has done the same, although not in the last couple of years due to the ankle problems. (I could go pull stats on one particular game in Phoenix, when Tim and Tony were both out. I won't take the time. If you don't believe it, nothing will convince you.) Surely you don't dispute Tim's ability to carry a team?

Let's just agree to disagree on Bosh. I said he's a good player, and he is. I just don't think he comes close to rising to the level of some of the other players on that list. D Wade can carry a team. LeBron can carry a team. Bosh? Not so much. And that shoots down the Big 3 label, in my mind. LeBron needs a good big man on the team, and Bosh is a good big man. I wouldn't build a team around him.

There was/is something special about the Spurs Big 3. Compiling a 14-team list of Big 3's that includes Emeka Okafor sort of cheapens that, don't you agree? Or am I just being too much of a homer?

[Mal]

4. Atlanta Hawks
Al Horford, Josh Smith and Joe Johnson
:lol

5. Oklahoma City Thunder
Jeff Green, Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook
:lol
7. Chicago Bulls
Joakim Noah, Derrick Rose and Carlos Boozer
:lol

11. Portland Trailblazers
Brandon Roy, LaMarcus Aldridge and Nicholas Batum :lol @ Batum

12. Milwaukee Bucks
John Salmons, Brandon Jennings, Andrew Bogut :lol @ Salmons

13. Memphis Grizzlies
Marc Gasol, OJ Mayo and Rudy Gay :lol Elvis

14. New Orleans Hornets
David West, Chris Paul and Emeka Okafor :lol @ Okafor

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/1011/top.nba.trios/content.1.html

[johnnySpurs]

Two issues with this list.

1) It's theoretical
2) It's fucked

The #1 team on the list hasn't played 10 games together yet. The #7 team hasn't played a single game together, and it's possible that their 3 best performers could include Deng by the way he's played this season. Hawks is laughable, and Jeff Green is average, at best. The only Celtics player that outperforms any of our big 3 so far is Rondo. In all fairness, by seasons end I do think the Heat will have one of the better big 3, but I have a very hard time placing them above the Lakers.

1) Lakers
2) Heat
3) Spurs
4) Celtics
5) Bulls

Nobody else is worth mention, IMO. In order to be a 'big' three, you need three worthy of the 'big' title.

[romain.star]

Bosch can carry a team? to what? failure?

Sorry if it was not clear enough... I meant that players like Bosh, TP or Manu can't carry a team by themselves. So I guess we kind of agree here

[TJastal]

Two issues with this list.

1) It's theoretical
2) It's fucked

The #1 team on the list hasn't played 10 games together yet. The #7 team hasn't played a single game together, and it's possible that their 3 best performers could include Deng by the way he's played this season. Hawks is laughable, and Jeff Green is average, at best. The only Celtics player that outperforms any of our big 3 so far is Rondo. In all fairness, by seasons end I do think the Heat will have one of the better big 3, but I have a very hard time placing them above the Lakers.

1) Lakers
2) Heat
3) Spurs
4) Celtics
5) Bulls

Nobody else is worth mention, IMO. In order to be a 'big' three, you need three worthy of the 'big' title.

lol bulls Noah & Boozehound being worthy

[romain.star]

Look, no player can carry a team to a championship by himself. LeBron is living proof of that. My point was that those three guys were capable of being the certerpiece of a team. Especially at their primes, when the Big 3 label was given to them.

When Manu was hobbled by his ankle, and Tim by his knee, Tony did one hell of a job of carrying the team. Manu has done the same, although not in the last couple of years due to the ankle problems. (I could go pull stats on one particular game in Phoenix, when Tim and Tony were both out. I won't take the time. If you don't believe it, nothing will convince you.) Surely you don't dispute Tim's ability to carry a team?

Let's just agree to disagree on Bosh. I said he's a good player, and he is. I just don't think he comes close to rising to the level of some of the other players on that list. D Wade can carry a team. LeBron can carry a team. Bosh? Not so much. And that shoots down the Big 3 label, in my mind. LeBron needs a good big man on the team, and Bosh is a good big man. I wouldn't build a team around him.

There was/is something special about the Spurs Big 3. Compiling a 14-team list of Big 3's that includes Emeka Okafor sort of cheapens that, don't you agree? Or am I just being too much of a homer?

I totally agree man.

It just depends on what you mean by carrying a team (TP or Manu could carry the Spurs for 10 games but i don't see them being the go to guy of a winning team during an entire season).


To me, a relevant Big 3 is made of one MVP player plus 2 all star players. Back in the mid 00', the Spurs Big 3 was really special in that regard.
The Heat might be even more special since their Big 3 is made of 2 MVPs and 1 AS...

[TJastal]

I totally agree man.

It just depends on what you mean by carrying a team (TP or Manu could carry the Spurs for 10 games but i don't see them being the go to guy of a winning team during an entire season).


To me, a relevant Big 3 is made of one MVP player plus 2 all star players. Back in the mid 00', the Spurs Big 3 was really special in that regard.
The Heat might be even more special since their Big 3 is made of 2 MVPs and 1 AS...

MVP candidate + all star + star should be more than enough to be considered.

And the level of competition keeps rising each year, so I think its come to the point where teams really need a 'Big 4' quite honestly. Which basically means 2 all stars (with 1 MVP candidate) & 2 stars


Celtics - Rondo, Pierce, Allen, Garnett

Spurs - Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Jefferson

Lakers - Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Artest

Not surprisingly these 4 teams have won the last 4 championships.

[howbouthemspurs]

Horrible list.. The spurs trio is in the top 3 in my opinion! They have a proven track record and they now look as good as they ever did!

[romain.star]

MVP candidate + all star + star should be more than enough to be considered.

And the level of competition keeps rising each year, so I think its come to the point where teams really need a 'Big 4' quite honestly. Which basically means 2 all stars (with 1 MVP candidate) & 2 stars


Celtics - Rondo, Pierce, Allen, Garnett

Spurs - Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Jefferson

Lakers - Kobe, Gasol, Odom, Artest

Not surprisingly these 4 teams have won the last 4 championships.

I miss bowen !

[GSH]

I totally agree man.

It just depends on what you mean by carrying a team (TP or Manu could carry the Spurs for 10 games but i don't see them being the go to guy of a winning team during an entire season).


To me, a relevant Big 3 is made of one MVP player plus 2 all star players. Back in the mid 00', the Spurs Big 3 was really special in that regard.
The Heat might be even more special since their Big 3 is made of 2 MVPs and 1 AS...

I don't know - maybe I underestimate Bosh. And I'll even give you Tony. But I really do believe that Manu could have been a franchise player in his own right, on some other team. Titles are difficult things, since only 1 team can win each year. But I think Manu could have kept a team in the playoffs consistently.

I don't think a lot of people understand what Manu gave up by agreeing to come off the bench like he did for all those years. Maybe that does make me a homer - and I mean that. But maybe it takes a home town fan to really understand, since most analysts and commentators only see a few games per year all the way through.

I remember so many times where you could just see that Manu made up his mind that he wasn't going to let the team lose. And he did whatever it took to make sure it didn't happen. I guess that's what I mean by being able to carry a team. He put the win on his shoulders, and so much of the time he carried through. He did it in internation ball, too. I don't think he's an over-achiever. I think he's really that good.

The whole Big 3 thing is just way overdone in the media. Maybe the definition ought to be that they are all three really good, and they have actually won something. What if the Heat can't get the chemistry right, and flame out in the first or second round of the playoffs?

Come back with a ring, guys. Then we'll compare you to the Spurs, Lakers, and Celtics Big 3's.

[sa_butta]

Sports Illustrated, leading the way with quality ANALysis.

[HarlemHeat37]

The rings argument doesn't really make any sense..

The Spurs big 3 last won a ring in 2007..are Duncan and Manu still the same players they were at that time? no..it's arguable that Parker isn't even as good as he was at that time(although I wouldn't argue it)..so if they haven't won a ring in 3 years and 2/3 of the big 3 has declined, why should their last title matter?..experience? does experience really negate the loss of ability? obviously not..

The Lakers big 3 is currently Kobe/Gasol/Odom because of the way Odom has played this season..while Odom was clearly the Lakers 3rd best player for their 2 titles, however, was he good enough to be considered in an actual "big 3"?..

The Celtics won their only title with the big 3 of KG/Pierce/Allen..Ray Allen has clearly fallen off..while they made the Finals with Rondo as 1/3 of their new big 3, he only has a championship as a clear role player that struggled when he was on the floor..so does that count?..

[romain.star]

I don't know - maybe I underestimate Bosh. And I'll even give you Tony. But I really do believe that Manu could have been a franchise player in his own right, on some other team. Titles are difficult things, since only 1 team can win each year. But I think Manu could have kept a team in the playoffs consistently.

I don't think a lot of people understand what Manu gave up by agreeing to come off the bench like he did for all those years. Maybe that does make me a homer - and I mean that. But maybe it takes a home town fan to really understand, since most analysts and commentators only see a few games per year all the way through.

I remember so many times where you could just see that Manu made up his mind that he wasn't going to let the team lose. And he did whatever it took to make sure it didn't happen. I guess that's what I mean by being able to carry a team. He put the win on his shoulders, and so much of the time he carried through. He did it in internation ball, too. I don't think he's an over-achiever. I think he's really that good.

The whole Big 3 thing is just way overdone in the media. Maybe the definition ought to be that they are all three really good, and they have actually won something. What if the Heat can't get the chemistry right, and flame out in the first or second round of the playoffs?

Come back with a ring, guys. Then we'll compare you to the Spurs, Lakers, and Celtics Big 3's.

As good as Manu is/was, i don't think he could have been a successfull go to guy.

2 main reasons for that:
a/ unconsistency: MVP players like TD, Kobe, LBJ or Wade are able to deliver 20 or 30 great games in a row. Manu just can't and never did (even during his NBA prime)
b/ Physically limited: the main reason he never played more than 30 minutes a game was because he did not have the physical hability to efficiently carry the load for +35 minutes a game during an entire season. IMHO, Manu's greatness also comes from the fact that he is on the floor for a limited time. Had he spent more time on the floor, his amazing PER would have been much less impressive...

[cheguevara]

Sorry if it was not clear enough... I meant that players like Bosh, TP or Manu can't carry a team by themselves. So I guess we kind of agree here

I don't think the definition of being one of a big 3 is being able to carry a team.

IMO if the player can be the best player in many other teams, then he is a big 3.

Parker, Manu or Bosch could be best players in many other teams, so they are legit part of a big 3

[lilvic922]

WTF??
Since when Bonston and LA has a big 3??
Tha one and only BIG 3 in tha fuckin NBA is Tony, Tim and Manu