The better frontcourt

[ajh18]

In Rosen's "ranking the best frontcourts" article, the Pistons are ranked as the #1 frontcourt in the NBA, and are even compared to the great Celtics frontcourt of Bird, Parish, and McHale. I stated that I actually believe that our '99 frontcourt was superior to the current Pistons', and no one replied. So I was curious as to the general opinion of the forum members: which frontcourt would you take? The 2005 Pistons, or the 1999 Spurs? Based on stats, it comes out fairly close:

PPG RPG APG BPG SPG
99 SPURS
C: Robinson 15.8 10.0 2.1 2.4 1.4
PF: Duncan 21.7 11.4 2.4 2.5 0.9
SF: Elliott 11.2 4.3 2.3 0.3 0.5
TOTALS: 48.7 25.7 6.8 5.2 2.8

05 PISTONS
C: Wallace 9.7 12.2 1.7 2.4 1.4
PF: Wallace 14.5 8.2 1.8 1.5 0.8
SF: Prince 14.7 5.3 3.0 0.9 0.7
TOTALS: 38.9 25.7 6.5 4.8 2.9

Statistically, the numbers are frighteningly similar, with the Spurs holding a slight edge in scoring. So which frontline would you rather have? And if the Spurs of 99 are so close to the current Pistons, then why are they not as much a standard of comparison of great frontcourts as the old Celtic's team?

[xcoriate]

The sspurs clearly hold the statistical advantage there. 10 points is not a slight margin either on offense.

[TDMVPDPOY]

99 drob is better then the dpoy wallace

[jochhejaam]

99 drob is better then the dpoy wallace
Overall yes David's the best, defensively Wallace gets the nod.

[jochhejaam]

In Rosen's "ranking the best frontcourts" article, the Pistons are ranked as the #1 frontcourt in the NBA, and are even compared to the great Celtics frontcourt of Bird, Parish, and McHale. I stated that I actually believe that our '99 frontcourt was superior to the current Pistons', and no one replied. So I was curious as to the general opinion of the forum members: which frontcourt would you take? The 2005 Pistons, or the 1999 Spurs? Based on stats, it comes out fairly close:

PPG RPG APG BPG SPG
99 SPURS
C: Robinson 15.8 10.0 2.1 2.4 1.4
PF: Duncan 21.7 11.4 2.4 2.5 0.9
SF: Elliott 11.2 4.3 2.3 0.3 0.5
TOTALS: 48.7 25.7 6.8 5.2 2.8

05 PISTONS
C: Wallace 9.7 12.2 1.7 2.4 1.4
PF: Wallace 14.5 8.2 1.8 1.5 0.8
SF: Prince 14.7 5.3 3.0 0.9 0.7
TOTALS: 38.9 25.7 6.5 4.8 2.9

Statistically, the numbers are frighteningly similar, with the Spurs holding a slight edge in scoring. So which frontline would you rather have? And if the Spurs of 99 are so close to the current Pistons, then why are they not as much a standard of comparison of great frontcourts as the old Celtic's team?
I'd have to go with the Spurs based on the 10 pt scoring differential, that's substantial. With a deeper team this year and our starters playing fewer mins. I don't expect our starting frontcourt scoring to go up.

[SA210]

I'd have to go with the twin towers, hands down.

[JamStone]

Consider that the starting backcourt of the 99 Spurs was Avery Johnson and Mario Elie? or Jeran Jackson? Not sure who starter at the 2 and the 2005 Pistons had Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton, the scoring differential is easier to understand. The Spurs offense in 99 still centered around Tim Duncan in the post. The 2005 Pistons offense was based on Rip Hamilton's off-the-ball movement.

I really liked the 99 Spurs, but I think the scoring differential has to be taken into context. I think it's a toss-up between the two frontcourts.

[ShoogarBear]

Consider that the starting backcourt of the 99 Spurs was Avery Johnson and Mario Elie? or Jeran Jackson? Not sure who starter at the 2 and the 2005 Pistons had Chauncey Billups and Rip Hamilton, the scoring differential is easier to understand. The Spurs offense in 99 still centered around Tim Duncan in the post. The 2005 Pistons offense was based on Rip Hamilton's off-the-ball movement.

I really liked the 99 Spurs, but I think the scoring differential has to be taken into context. I think it's a toss-up between the two frontcourts.

I could make the reverse argument. The Spurs scoring was centered around the frontcourt because it was reliable. The Pistons would not have won if they had to depend on a consistent offensive output from Wallace and Prince.

To put it another way, the Pistons could not have won with a backcourt of AJ and Elie.

[exstatic]

To me, the "tipper" is Sean vs. Tayshaun. Sean was a tough as nails veteran by then. I like Tayshaun's abilities, but he still seems passive to me, like Sean circa the Rockets series in 95.

[JamStone]

I could make the reverse argument. The Spurs scoring was centered around the frontcourt because it was reliable. The Pistons would not have won if they had to depend on a consistent offensive output from Wallace and Prince.

To put it another way, the Pistons could not have won with a backcourt of AJ and Elie.



Fair enough, but you play with what you got. The team was built with the scoring dependent on backcourt production. For what the Pistons needed, its frontcourt was a great blend of defense, rebounding, shot-blocking, and sufficient offense. The original list and article does not take into account bench. And, that lack of scoring in the starting frontcourt is supplemented by Antonio McDyess. The 99 Spurs frontcourt was excellent. Who were the back-ups? Samaki Walker? Danny Ferry?

[JamStone]

To me, the "tipper" is Sean vs. Tayshaun. Sean was a tough as nails veteran by then. I like Tayshaun's abilities, but he still seems passive to me, like Sean circa the Rockets series in 95.


Agreed to a certain extent. However, Elliot was also starting to decline in production by then, his 10th season, I think. Though Prince is certainly passive at times, it's a product of having three offensively prolific teammates in the starting line-up. But, with Prince, in a seven game series, you can count on him to almost completely lock the primary offensive perimeter player on the opposing team for two out of the seven games, much like Bruce does for the current Spurs team. Those two games can shift the balance of a 7 game series. It worked against premier players like Kobe and T-Mac, and to a certain extent Iverson and Wade. I like having that stopper. Did the 99 Spurs have a perimeter stopper?

[ShoogarBear]

Fair enough, but you play with what you got. The team was built with the scoring dependent on backcourt production. For what the Pistons needed, its frontcourt was a great blend of defense, rebounding, shot-blocking, and sufficient offense.

True, but I think most people would agree that if you swapped out Robinson, Duncan, and Elliott on the 04 Pistons, they would have been a much better team.



The original list and article does not take into account bench. And, that lack of scoring in the starting frontcourt is supplemented by Antonio McDyess. The 99 Spurs frontcourt was excellent. Who were the back-ups? Samaki Walker? Danny Ferry?

1. I don't think you should take into account bench. We're comparing starting lineups.

2. For this discusion, I'm only comparing the championship squads, so would have to use Okur, not McDyess.

3. Neither Walker nor Ferry was there in 99. The backups were Malik Rose, Jerome Kersey, Will Perdue, and Gerard King.

[ShoogarBear]

Did the 99 Spurs have a perimeter stopper?

Elliott and Elie served that role, depending on the opponent.

[JamStone]

True, but I think most people would agree that if you swapped out Robinson, Duncan, and Elliott on the 04 Pistons, they would have been a much better team.


1. I don't think you should take into account bench. We're comparing starting lineups.

2. For this discusion, I'm only comparing the championship squads, so would have to use Okur, not McDyess.

3. Neither Walker nor Ferry was there in 99. The backups were Malik Rose, Jerome Kersey, Will Perdue, and Gerard King.



1. The original article never said the comparisons were limited only to "starting lineups." It only lists the starters, but it does not state ONLY starters.

2. The original post compared the 1999 Spurs to the "CURRENT" Pistons squad. You are changing the discussion.

3. Those back-ups would lead me to believe the Pistons has a slightly better frontcourt with Dice (giving a solid 20 mpg and the depth of having Elden Campbell) if we include "depth" into the equation. Duncan carried that frontcourt, and both D-Rob and Elliot were on the decline of their respective careers.

[san antonio spurs]

I could make the reverse argument. The Spurs scoring was centered around the frontcourt because it was reliable. The Pistons would not have won if they had to depend on a consistent offensive output from Wallace and Prince.

To put it another way, the Pistons could not have won with a backcourt of AJ and Elie.
excellent point,and since we are comparing the 2 front courts,ours in 99 seems better
________
Magic (http://www.girlcamfriend.com/cam/Magic/)

[Solid D]

You are asking this in a Spurs forum.

I'd say the 1998-99 Spurs.

The twin towers, who were basically All-Stars every year they played, plus Sean Elliott who was considered one of the better perimeter defenders in his prime, to go with his 2-time All-Star offensive skills. That team set an NBA record for modern era Opp. FG%.

There have been several other great frontcourts who played during or after the Parish, McHale, Bird, Maxwell/Walton era. Mid-80s Lakers, there was Jabbar, McAdoo, Wilkes, Worthy (rookie). There was Moses Malone, young Barkley, and old Dr. J and Bobby Jones together for a couple of seasons in Phily. Brad Daugherty, Hot Rod Williams, Larry Nance, Ty Corbin, Mark West with Cleveland. Shaq, Horace Grant and Nick Anderson wasn't too bad. Ewing, Oakley, Larry Johnson, Buck Williams was good. Let's not forget Shaq, Horry, Fox, Rice, Green and George with Salley towel waving.

[exstatic]

Did the 99 Spurs have a perimeter stopper?
Sean. People forget, but he was a lockdown defender. He, like DRob, sacrificed numbers on the scoring end for the team concept, and for defnese. One of the reasons that LA vaulted over SA for a few years was the delay in finding his replacement. We finally got Bowen in the summer of 2001.

I remember Sean saying that MJ stopped him in the tunnel one time, and told him that no one played him tougher. Sean's daughter, no coincidence is named Jordyn.