Ranking the best and worst front courts

Ranking the best and worst front courts
Charley Rosen / Special to FOXSports.com
Posted: 47 minutes ago

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/5026576?print=true

Small forwards are easily the NBA's most versatile athletes. Their job description requires them to do everything from rebounding (one carom per six minutes of playing time is the norm) to running (it's the No. 3 who puts the zip in a fast break). From handling — at least well enough to create his own shots and also to help overcome pressure defenses — to passing; from shooting to defending; small forwards are actually big-littles, and, along with the guards, are deemed one of the skill positions.

Defense-oriented small forwards (like Bruce Bowen) are highly valued by coaches, but their lack of offense must be compensated by a power forward who can light up a scoreboard. Still, most of the outstanding small forwards in NBA history (Paul Arizin, Rick Barry, Larry Bird, Julius Erving, Bernard King, Bobby Dandridge, et al) were primarily celebrated for their scoring prowess.
2005 NBA Preview

Power forwards used to be called hatchet men. The blunt edges of their talents hewed out rebounds, picks, defense, and the kind of selective brutality essential to any contact sport. Guys like Antonio Davis, Dale Davis, Danny Fortson, Eduardo Najera, Malik Rose, and Kelvin Cato are cast in the traditional mode. But in recent years, the practitioners of the No. 4 spot have become more like oversized small forwards. This new wave of powerless power forwards include Dirk Nowitzki, Troy Murphy, Eddie Griffin, Vladimir Radmanovic, and Shawn Marion.

Neither of these two classifications is intrinsically better than the other. Indeed, the biggest measure of a power forward's worth depends upon the complimentary talents of his center, as well as his particular function in his team's game plan.

By definition, centers are in the middle of the action. Bigs who can score in the pivot cause defenses to make risky adjustments simply because the ball is so close to the basket. Because such monsters-in-the middle generally attract double-teams, they must also be adequate passers. Centers who can shoot from the perimeter put enormous pressure on their opposite numbers, who are rarely comfortable playing defense beyond the shadow of the basket. Since No. 5s are the last line of a team's defense, shot-blocking centers can always find a job.

If Shaq represents the old-time Mikan-Chamberlain tradition of dreadnaught pivot men, Amare Stoudemire just might be a sign of things to come. Quickness overcoming power. Finesse trumping bulk. Versatility vexing lane-bound scorers.

In determining the best and the worst of the NBA's frontcourts, the emphasis is on the balance of the collective talents rather than on the individual brilliance of any one player.


BEST FRONTCOURTS
1. DETROIT — Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace, and Ben Wallace

Prince and R. Wallace provide the offense, while all three are superlative defenders. The only pertinent question is this: Is this trio better than the Bird-McHale-Parish triumvirate? On defense, the Pistons are clearly superior, while the Celtics frontline rates a similar edge on offense. The deciding difference in Boston's favor is that Dennis Johnson was light years better than any of Detroit's current guards.

2. INDIANA — Ron Artest, Jermaine O'Neal, and Jeff Foster

A potentially potent combination of scoring, defense, rebounding, and role playing. This, however, is a critical season for the Pacers' front-court. Can Artest behave himself? Can O'Neal survive the regular season and be healthy in the playoffs? Can Foster hit more than an occasional jump shot? Given three affirmative answers, Indiana's baseline players will evolve from potential to actual greatness.

3. MIAMI — James Posey, Udonis Haslem, and Shaquille O'Neal An outstanding point-maker flanked by a pair of outstanding defenders. The X-factor here is Posey's ability to regain not only his shooting touch, but his commitment to playing hard. Should Antoine Walker supplant Posey in the starting lineup, then Miami will drop out of the elite rankings.

4. SAN ANTONIO — Bruce Bowen, Tim Duncan, and Nazr Mohammed/Rasho Nesterovic

Bowen gets paid for playing defense, yet his ability to sink 3-balls is particularly suited to the routine double-teams faced by Duncan. Mohammed's mediocre skills — offensive rebounding, hustling, and staying out of TD's way — are likewise more functional with the Spurs than they would be elsewhere. Nesterovic remains an underrated center who can score, pass, and set timber-shivering picks. But it's the all-around game of Duncan that maximizes his teammates' effectiveness.

5. HOUSTON — Tracy McGrady, Juwan Howard, and Yao Ming

Scoring is their common forte, and upon occasion T-Mac can do a reasonable impersonation of an NBA defender. Also, McGrady is the only one of the three who has any lateral movement. But, man, these guys can fill the basket!

On the verge — DENVER (Carmelo Anthony, Kenyon Martin and Marcus Camby would be appreciably better with Nene in the mix), UTAH (Andrei Kirilenko, Carlos Boozer, Jarron Collins).


WORST FRONTCOURTS
1. ATLANTA — Josh Childress, Al Harrington, and Zaza Pachulia

Some day Childress will be able to differentiate between a good and a bad shot. Godot might show up sooner than Harrington's offense. And Pachulia still avoids going to the beach lest some bully kick sand in his face.

2. TORONTO — Jalen Rose, Chris Bosh, and Rafael Araujo

A selfish play-breaker, a young stud, and the reincarnation of the Invisible Man. Put them all together in one body and the resulting Frankenstein would still be defenseless.

3. PORTLAND — Ruben Patterson, Zach Randolph, and Joel Przybilla

A dysfunctional sandwich: An excellent defender and rebounder surrounded by a pair of immature malcontents. Heavy on the mustard and sour pickles.

4. MINNESOTA — Kevin Garnett, Wally Szczerbiak, and Michael Olowokandi

If Tim Duncan can do enough to bring his frontcourt mates into harmony, Garnett can't do the same. So far, KG has not demonstrated the ability to be a big-time clutch performer in the postseason. Also, Szczerbiak is too immobile to hitch a ride to glory with the Big Ticket. And Olowokandi's game is as substantial as cotton-Kandi.

5. N.O. — Bostjan Nachbar, P. J. Brown, and your guess is as good as mine

Nachbar is a sleeper, but the 36-year-old Brown is playing on fumes. Replacing Jamaal Magloire (who was traded to the Bucks) with any combo of Chris Andersen, Maciej Lampe, and Jackson Vroman, and/or re-shifting Brown to center is a recipe for another 18-win season. There won't be any quality bigs on the waiver wire, and whom else can the Hornets use as trade bait? Replacing Nachbar with Desmond Mason is an upgrade, but the Hornets' front line remains a disaster.

On the precipice — LA LAKERS (Lamar Odom, Chris Mihm, and Kwame Brown), ORLANDO (Kelvin Cato, Pat Garrity, and the remains of Grant Hill), CHICAGO (Luol Deng, Darius Songalia, and Tyson Chandler lack firepower), GOLDEN STATE (Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, Adonal Foyle could comprise the worst defensive combo), and PHILADELPHIA (Kyle Korver, Chrius Webber, and Samuel Dalembert).

Ya. Detroit has #1 frontcourt and #2 backcourt.

I'm dumbfounded. I don't know what to say. At least there were a couple good points in there, I think.

The usual :wtf 's from Rosen:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Senile Fart

BEST FRONTCOURTS
1. DETROIT — Tayshaun Prince, Rasheed Wallace, and Ben Wallace

Prince and R. Wallace provide the offense, while all three are superlative defenders. The only pertinent question is this: Is this trio better than the Bird-McHale-Parish triumvirate?

---

Um, are Price and Wallace headed for the HoF any time soon? The one time Rosen can legitimately lobby for the old farts, and he blows it.

Quote:

---

The deciding difference in Boston's favor is that Dennis Johnson was light years better than any of Detroit's current guards.

---

Um, no. DJ was a better defender and playmaker, but he was way inferior to both Billups and Hamilton on offense.

Quote:

---

WORST FRONTCOURTS
1. ATLANTA — Josh Childress, Al Harrington, and Zaza Pachulia

---

Only mildly surprised Rosen didn't use this opportunity to trash Collier.

Quote:

---

4. MINNESOTA — Kevin Garnett, Wally Szczerbiak, and Michael Olowokandi

If Tim Duncan can do enough to bring his frontcourt mates into harmony, Garnett can't do the same. So far, KG has not demonstrated the ability to be a big-time clutch performer in the postseason. Also, Szczerbiak is too immobile to hitch a ride to glory with the Big Ticket. And Olowokandi's game is as substantial as cotton-Kandi.

---

A test of your integrity: With all the Rosen-bashing previously done, you cannot now say he really knows what he's talking about, even if he got one right.

:lol @ kg at 4th worst

i dont know how miami is ranked ahead of spurs

pacers are agruable i guess

pistons make sense

I, too, am dumbfounded. Rosen is a moron.

Quote:

---

Nesterovic remains an underrated center who can score, pass, and set timber-shivering picks.

---

So true.

Is he really saying that the Minnesota frontcourt is worse than the Hornets? Or is 5 the worst? Either way, this column smells like bait.

Im curious as to why Rose in Orlando's frontcourt has them not starting Dwight Howard.


Howard, Battie, Hill is the frontcourt.

Pretty good front court when healthy IMO.

I think either we or New Orleans have the worst frontcourt. Our team is pathetic right now.

[QUOTE=inagra]
pacers are agruable i guess
QUOTE]

No they arent.

Yup, its on KG. I mean, in one breath he says how valuble defenders are at the SF spot and how they have to be the most versatile. Replace Bowen with Wally and that list is swapped.

So KG is not at fault??

Of course not.....

I think our '99 front court was superior to the current Pistons'. Also, Duncan fits into neither of his "types" of power forwards, and this "new wave" of pivot man that Amare is the model of... well, it's been done before (see Kemp, Sampson, and of course, Robinson).

Quote:

---

The deciding difference in Boston's favor is that Dennis Johnson was light years better than any of Detroit's current guards.

---

Light years better than Billups or Hamilton? I don't think so!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jochhejaam

Light years better than Billups or Hamilton? I don't think so!

---

I agree. DJ was a much better defender than either, but they are each much better scorers.

I can't believe he left Stromile Swift out of Houston's frontcourt....

This is the most ridiculous ranking I've seen in awhile.

Any frontcourt with Duncan is better than all those front court combos, with the possible exception of any line up with Shaq, KG, and the Pistons frontcourt.

He's basically saying the James Posey and Udonis fucking Haselm are better than Bowen and Nazr/Rasho. That's ludicrous. Nor is Indiana's front court better than SA's. Bowen is better than Artest (because he can defend without throwing punches) and Nazr/Rasho are as good as Foster, and Duncan makes O'Neal look like a Keebler elf.

In fact, Duncan and the Keebler elves would be a better front court than almost any of these frontcourts.

KG and the Keebler elves would <i>still</i> not be in the worst frontcourts in the NBA. I'm appalled that anyone would suggest it would be. K

[QUOTE=romsey31]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inagra

pacers are agruable i guess
QUOTE]

No they arent.

---

Romsey I think he means Pacers are arguably in the correct Spot..

Which is a fair assesment

Quote:

---

Nesterovic remains an underrated center who can score, pass, and set timber-shivering picks. But it's the all-around game of Duncan that maximizes his teammates' effectiveness

---

I know he shivers Angel Luvs and RashoFan's timbers! :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supergirl

Bowen is better than Artest (because he can defend without throwing punches)

---

You are obviously a Homer if you think Bowen is better than Artest, please pack your shit and leave...

Where the heck is the Suns front court of Marion, Thomas and...........................ummmm............... ............

.........uhh...................................... .....................

...........................hmmm................... .....ummm....

Jones! that's it. Yeah take that Rosen! HA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hegamboa

I can't believe he left Stromile Swift out of Houston's frontcourt....

---

I agree, Yao, Swift, and McGrady is a pretty good front court if you ask me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frank Slakd

Romsey I think he means Pacers are arguably in the correct Spot..

Which is a fair assesment

---

Ok my bad.

"Yao, Swift, and McGrady"

may be, but Jeff has been starting Juwan in pre-season.

Just a thought: Didn't the number 4 frontcourt just beat the number 1 frontcourt a couple of months ago? Didn't the number 1 frontcourt's supposedly inferior backcourt actually keep the team in the series? I think so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons

"Yao, Swift, and McGrady"

may be, but Jeff has been starting Juwan in pre-season.

---

Oh, ok. Well in SI they said those were the starters, with Anderson and Alston at the guards. Those three could be #1 if they play those positions.

Gail Goodrich was just saying on NBA TV that he expects Jeff to have many starting combos, unlike Pop.

Stromile is a hell of an athlete, let's see if he can play "serious" in JVG style.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samikeyp

I know he shivers Angel Luvs and RashoFan's timbers! :)

---

You beat me to it! :flipoff :lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

Just a thought: Didn't the number 4 frontcourt just beat the number 1 frontcourt a couple of months ago? Didn't the number 1 frontcourt's supposedly inferior backcourt actually keep the team in the series? I think so.

---

Yes, Spurs beat the Pistons, but I don't think the frontcourts just played the frontcourts and the backcourts just played the backcourts.

And, actually, I recall it taking 7 full games for the Spurs' "frontcourt" to beat the Pistons' "frontcourt." And, in that 7th game, because of foul trouble, the Spurs' "frontcourt" made their mark against the bench and makeshift frontcourt. And, Rosen didn't take into account bench play. It was the Spurs' superior depth on the bench, 3 point shooting, and ability to stay out of foul trouble in that 7th game that sealed the deal. Any frontcourt with Tim Duncan should be ranked high. I don't know why you feel the need to hype your frontcourt up more than it is.

And, was it a back-handed compliment or were you saying that the Pistons backcourt is better than the Spurs' backcourt? The backcourt did not carry the Pistons in the finals. The backcourt are the primary scorers and playmakers. That's part of their responsbility. The frontcourt of the Pistons are the last line of defense, rebounders, and complimentary scorers. I wouldn't say the backcourt carried the Pistons against the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Yes, Spurs beat the Pistons, but I don't think the frontcourts just played the frontcourts and the backcourts just played the backcourts.

And, actually, I recall it taking 7 full games for the Spurs' "frontcourt" to beat the Pistons' "frontcourt." And, in that 7th game, because of foul trouble, the Spurs' "frontcourt" made their mark against the bench and makeshift frontcourt. And, Rosen didn't take into account bench play. It was the Spurs' superior depth on the bench, 3 point shooting, and ability to stay out of foul trouble in that 7th game that sealed the deal. Any frontcourt with Tim Duncan should be ranked high. I don't know why you feel the need to hype your frontcourt up more than it is.

And, was it a back-handed compliment or were you saying that the Pistons backcourt is better than the Spurs' backcourt? The backcourt did not carry the Pistons in the finals. The backcourt are the primary scorers and playmakers. That's part of their responsbility. The frontcourt of the Pistons are the last line of defense, rebounders, and complimentary scorers. I wouldn't say the backcourt carried the Pistons against the Spurs.

---

I don't know why you feel the need to try to prevent me from giving some props to my team, especially since they did kick your team's ass. :)

In addition "staying out of foul trouble" is part of playing defense. Due to his ankles, a huge adjustment to Duncan's game was getting opponents into foul trouble. You make it sound like it just happened. It didn't.

I was most definitely complimenting the Pistons backcourt. There is no doubt in my mind that they played very well, and are extremely underrated, as that article is a shining example. If Parker hadn't played such good defense against Hamilton one could make a convincing argument that they were better than Parker and Ginobili. I'd take both of those guys on my team anytime.

Not trying to prevent you from giving props to your team. It just seems you are a little bitter that some writer ranked your frontcourt fourth instead of no. 1.

I haven't re-watched game 7, but I do recall that some of those fouls against Rasheed and McDyess were pretty questionable for a 7th game of the NBA Finals. I'm not making any excuses. The Spurs more than deserved to win. But, your comment that "Didn't the number 4 frontcourt just beat the number 1 frontcourt a couple of months ago?" makes it sound like there should be no question that the Spurs' frontcourt is much better than the Pistons'. And, I think as good as Duncan is, the Pistons' frontcourt is still a little better and more balanced.

PRESEASON HOGWASH. Rosen obviously missed last year's NBA Finals, thus relying on preseason standings. It's the trend among reports. Why actually investigate issue or question, when one in theory, could create their own "truth" to the story. Because isn't the truth simply what everyone wants to believe, or so we're told. :lol
Pistons, IMHO, have the best backcourt in the league, :rolleyes as much as I hate to admit it. Spurs are right behind them, and possibly could surpass them in such ranking. I find most of these ranking's to be worthy of nothing less than 1lb of dogshit, and a side dish cat urine. Point is I would not trade Tim, for any three player combination mentioned ahead of San Antonio. Yes, that includes Detriot. Is this arrogant, maybe, but hear me out. Rasheed is a talented player, when he wants to be. Ben is an awesome defensive specimen, but limited offensively. Tashaun is another great all-around player. But none of the mention, IMO, can be an effective leader. If I am correct, I would think Chauncy to be the leader. Tim is our leader, what good is a team full of all-stars if they have no leader, teams like Dallas, or Houston.

I think he got the top 5 right, only that Miami is inferior to the other 4.

I agree that Pistons and Pacers have as good if not better starting frontcourts than the Spurs. That's only cuz :
1) Our center spot is too weak for us to be better
2) Robert Horry doesn't figure in our starting lineup.

If you took the entire frontcourt (starters+bench) our 5 (TD, Bowen, Horry, Rasho, Nazr) make a pretty good combination.

That being the case, Pistons are an easy choice for #1 ... not surprising, since they have the best starting 5 in the league. Indiana is debatable, but there's some logic behind it.

Miami's frontcourt is totally untested. I'd put them at par with Dallas and well below Houston.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Not trying to prevent you from giving props to your team. It just seems you are a little bitter that some writer ranked your frontcourt fourth instead of no. 1.

I haven't re-watched game 7, but I do recall that some of those fouls against Rasheed and McDyess were pretty questionable for a 7th game of the NBA Finals. I'm not making any excuses. The Spurs more than deserved to win. But, your comment that "Didn't the number 4 frontcourt just beat the number 1 frontcourt a couple of months ago?" makes it sound like there should be no question that the Spurs' frontcourt is much better than the Pistons'. And, I think as good as Duncan is, the Pistons' frontcourt is still a little better and more balanced.

---

I'm not bitter, I'm just throwing a thought out there to contribute to the discussion. Considering the source, I'm actually surprised the Spurs were in the top 5.

I seem to recall "my" frontcourt winning a championship, leaving you complaining about questionable calls, which is what every single Spurs opponent does. I doubt that's a coincidence. In my opinion, there's no question that the Spurs are better in the frontcourt than Detroit, even with Duncan on two bad ankles and the starting center out. My additional opinion is that they proved it, because the backcourts were pretty even.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PM5K

You are obviously a Homer if you think Bowen is better than Artest, please pack your shit and leave...

---

I AM a Spurs homer, but I don't have to be to think Bowen is better than Artest. Lots of people do. When was the last time Bowen got thrown out of a game, much less a whole season? When was the last time Bowen assaulted a fan? Bowen plays D every bit as hard as Artest, but he knows where to draw the line. And it has nothing to do with Artest's "rough background" because there isn't a background around rougher than Bowen's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Supergirl

I AM a Spurs homer, but I don't have to be to think Bowen is better than Artest. Lots of people do. When was the last time Bowen got thrown out of a game, much less a whole season? When was the last time Bowen assaulted a fan? Bowen plays D every bit as hard as Artest, but he knows where to draw the line. And it has nothing to do with Artest's "rough background" because there isn't a background around rougher than Bowen's.

---

Werd. Talent doesn't mean much when you are watching the playoffs from your couch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Obstructed_View

I seem to recall "my" frontcourt winning a championship, leaving you complaining about questionable calls, which is what every single Spurs opponent does. I doubt that's a coincidence.

---

I seem to recall countless threads by Spurs Fan doing the exact same thing they roast opposing teams fans for: whining about the officiating. I doubt that's a coincidence as well...

Quote:

---

I seem to recall countless threads by Spurs Fan doing the exact same thing they roast opposing teams fans for: whining about the officiating. I doubt that's a coincidence as well...

---

no more so than Piston fan. Every team has a certain contingent that likes to blame the refs. More's the pity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samikeyp

no more so than Piston fan. Every team has a certain contingent that likes to blame the refs. More's the pity.

---

No doubt. Most fans do it at some point or another, it comes with being a fan.

I'll just say this: That had to be the most consistently inconsistent refereeing I've seen in an NBA Finals ever. The players from both teams had no idea what to expect from game to game...

Quote:

---

That had to be the most consistently inconsistent refereeing I've seen in an NBA Finals ever. The players from both teams had no idea what to expect from game to game...

---

I would agree with that.

I wasn't blaming the refs for the Pistons losing the Finals. The Spurs were the better team, and they deserved to win.

ObstructedView made the claim that the Spurs frontcourt beat the Pistons frontcourt last June. In his subsequent posts, he has intimated that the Spurs frontcourt to be a much better frontcourt, using the NBA finals as evidence.

My reference to game 7 and the officiating is merely to show that the Piston frontcourt pretty much held their own against the Spurs frontcourt, seeing how it took all 7 games to beat the Pistons. And, foul trouble (Ben with 5 fouls, Rasheed with 5 fouls, Dice with 4 fouls) hurt the Pistons' chances in that game 7. As such, I don't feel it's such a strong argument to say that "the Spurs beat the Pistons in the finals, therefore the Spurs frontcourt must be better than the Pistons frontcourt."

I categorically deny using officiating as an excuse to why the Pistons lost to the Spurs. That's a cop out. The Spurs were the better team. I used it to talk about the topic at hand.

And, ObstructedView, you say that the Pistons backcourt carried the Piston team and also that the "backcourts were even" therefore the Spurs frontcourt must have been better. You don't even take into consideration benchplay and coaching. The Spurs depth at all of their positions and their coaching also played a role in the Spurs winning it all. You cannot just say the backcourt were even, therefore the frontcourts must not have been even. You can't have a mutually exclusive argument when there are multiple variables coming into play.

2004 NBA FINALS

Spurs frontcourt (Duncan, Bowen, Mohammed)

34.7 points per game
22.8 rebounds per game
4.14 assists per game
3.71 blocks per game
4. 86 turnovers per game
FG%: .411

Pistons frontcourt (Wallace, Wallace, Prince)

31.7 points per game
20.8 rebounds per game
5.57 assists per game
6.0 blocks per game
3.14 turnovers per game
FG%: .449


The Spurs frontcourt were a better scoring group, which is no surprise since Tim Duncan scores so much and is the center of the offense and none of the Pistons frontcourt players is the center of the offense. Surprisingly, the Spurs had the advantage in rebounds, with a couple monster rebounding games by Timmy. The discrepencies in each category are not significant.


The other categories give a slight edge to the Pistons frontcourt in blocks, assists, fewer turnovers and field goal percentage. The FG% and blocks per game are rather significant for those categories.

If you break down the stats per player, you would also clearly identify that Tim Duncan basically carries that whole frontcourt in stats, while the Pistons frontcourt is much more balanced in all of the categories.

Now, it's nothing to take away from the greatness of Tim Duncan. We all know he's arguably the best player in the league. But, the original list is not one of "the best frontcourt players" in the league, individually. It's best frontcourts, OVERALL. The Pistons have more balance with all three starters contributing production, and I think that's why it was argued that they are the best frontcourt group in the league.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PM5K

You are obviously a Homer if you think Bowen is better than Artest, please pack your shit and leave...

---

Bowen is arguably better defender than Artest

As I am more or less neutral on the Spurs/Pistons issues, I'll weigh in. If the officiating had been even halfway decent in last's year's Finals, the series never has to go back to San Antonio. Take away the Piston's moving screens, and I am hard pressed to see how they would have won a game. Obviously, they could have found a new way to score if the moving screens had been called, so we'll never know.

IMHO, Rasheed should have fouled out of nearly every game. The refs called a technical on LB in Game 6 (?) instead of giving Rasheed a trip to the locker rooms for his second. That was beyond obvious.

It was also obvious that the refs put the squeeze on Ginobli in Games 3 and 4. Possibly, this was a "makeup" for some missed calls in Games 1 and 2. Yes, Virginia; Manu got away with a couple those nights. However, the refs have put themselves in a position where someone practically has to tuck the ball under their arm before they can call travelling.

Although the Pistons got the better end of the officiating overall, I think it actually hurt them in Game 7. When the game was called more or less straight up, they didn't seem prepared to me, and they really struggled to score at times. Hamilton was visibly rattled for most of the second half.

The NBA has more conspiracy theories than any other league for these reasons. First, it is obvious that they try to extend the Finals. I have seen it too many times. Second, the refs started working with about three sets of rules: the actual written rules, the unwritten rules that apply to everyone, and the unwritten rules that apply to superstars. By now, they have zero moral authority. In contrast, baseball umpires are virtually above criticism. The action is so isolated that they are correct about 99% of the time. When they do make mistakes, no one assumes that it is for some hidden agenda, because it has the appearance of an anamoly. Basketball is extremely difficult to officiate, and there are enough mistakes to see a pattern, whether one exists or not. Since everyone knows that Jordan gets an extra step to the basket, it's no wonder it seems sinister...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

ObstructedView made the claim that the Spurs frontcourt beat the Pistons frontcourt last June. In his subsequent posts, he has intimated that the Spurs frontcourt to be a much better frontcourt, using the NBA finals as evidence.

*snip*

And, ObstructedView, you say that the Pistons backcourt carried the Piston team and also that the "backcourts were even" therefore the Spurs frontcourt must have been better. You don't even take into consideration benchplay and coaching. The Spurs depth at all of their positions and their coaching also played a role in the Spurs winning it all. You cannot just say the backcourt were even, therefore the frontcourts must not have been even. You can't have a mutually exclusive argument when there are multiple variables coming into play.

---

Interesting points. It's nice to hear someone say that Pop is a better coach than Larry Brown. I'm not sure who you think the Spurs had coming off the bench that tipped the balance of power so drastically in their favor, though. McDyess and Hunter played pretty well for the Pistons on both ends of the floor. Barry had a couple of good games, aside from that I don't recall anyone really helping Horry. If the Spurs had Brown and Rasho in the rotation I'd be more inclined to agree with you.

The point that I was really making is that the Spurs beat the Pistons in the Finals and Duncan wasn't even remotely near 100 percent. I was also trying to work in my disgust with the lack of respect that the Pistons' guards get, but that's not the central issue to me. If the Pacers get moved up because Artesticle is on the roster, then someone should take into account that Duncan is now healthy.

EDIT: When it really comes down to it, I don't particularly care where anybody is ranked, other than for the folly of the discussion. The journey to prove people right and wrong begins tomorrow. And it couldn't come soon enough. I'm sure we all agree on that.

Quote:

---

You are obviously a Homer if you think Bowen is better than Artest, please pack your shit and leave...

---

Then the majority of NBA GM's are Spurs homers because they voted Bowen a better perimeter defender.

I forgot all about the original point of this thread.

You have to go by performance. On paper, the Pacers' frontcourt is pretty strong, especially when you consider that Foster wouldn't even start on many teams. I would argue that any of the Spurs' centers would be an upgrade, with the possible exception of Rasho. (Sorry gals, Foster makes a LOT less money.) That said, Foster is mentally and physically tough; he has been able to guard Shaq pretty effectively. (Scott Pollard also does fairly well against Shaq.) In terms of performance, this group really hasn't played together much, so I can't see rating them #2, period.

On paper, the Pistons aren't much. Rasheed doesn't do enough down low and takes way too many low percentage jumpers for his position. Ben can't score; however, he does pick up a lot of slack for the other Wallace. Prince may be the best overall player on the team, but he doesn't seem to get the ball consistently enough to get started some nights. OTOH, they obviously are among the very best, based on actual performance.

Obviously, I'm preaching to the choir here, but Bowen does a lot that doesn't show up in the stat line. Bowen is probably my favorite active player, so I am biased in that regard. Bowen can completely shut down a team's best offensive player. It is difficult to measure something like that, because anyone who has played even gym class basketball knows that it affects everyone when your #1 or #2 scorer is completely out of his/her game. You are almost forcing someone else to step up and force a career game, which usually doesn't work out so good... Tim Duncan is probably the best overall PF in the league. 'Nuff said. Like most teams, the Spurs don't really have a star center. Assuming Oberto is even half as good as people seem to think, the Spurs have insanse depth at a position where virtually no one else does. I don't see how you don't rank them #1, unless you are weighing the positions differently (i.e. Miami gets more points for Shaq than SA gets for Duncan, or whatever).

Centers are definitely at a premium. When you figure that virtually every big man leaves for the NBA as soon as possible, it's hard to believe how thin the position has become at the pro level. I guess we should blame overexpansion of the league. There are only so many guys over 6'10" out there, and some day scouts and GMs will eventually figure out that they can't all play basketball, after all. The PF position has certainly gained in prominence, which has further diluted the talent pool, as the PFs get taller and taller. When I was a kid, there's no way on earth that Duncan and Garnett aren't starting centers. There is such a disparity amongst starting NBA centers that you almost have to factor that in somehow. (You have to double Shaq sometimes; I don't think Pollard or Ben Wallace get doubled much!)

For me, it's difficut to rate an entire frontcourt in the abstract, because teams don't always play by the numbers anymore. The interaction with the guards can't be isolated or ignored. You have centers that are almost entirely defensive specialists or shotblockers. How many teams have tried the point forward experiment? Blah, blah, blah...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamStone

Spurs' superior depth on the bench, 3 point shooting, and ability to stay out of foul trouble in that 7th game that sealed the deal.

---

uhh. . . I don't think that the Spurs had a superior bench than the Pistons in the sense that we only had two reliable players come off the bench as the Pistons did.
Don't get me wrong I agree that the Pistons frontcourt is better than the Spurs frontcourt, and as was mentioned earlier if Horry were in the starting line-up, it might be a little different. But don't count the bench as part of the reason the Spurs won, because our benches cancelled each other out in my eyes..

Robert Horry stole a much needed victory from the jaws of defeat. Other than that, I would agree that bench play was not a factor in the Finals. The Spurs did have the better bench, but they didn't use it much either.

The way Pop uses Ginobli clouds the issue at times. I always think of him as a starter, even when he technically does not start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Reggie Miller

As I am more or less neutral on the Spurs/Pistons issues, I'll weigh in. .

---

Let's take a quick look at recent history. Pistons have made Indiana players, coaches and fans miserable for the last 2 years.
And you're more or less neutral? :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marklar MM

Ya. Detroit has #1 frontcourt and #2 backcourt.

---

Yet Dennis Johnson was much better than any of Detroit's current guards, according to Rosen. I loved DJ, but Billips had the best playoffs of any Piston over the last two years. DJ was always behind Boston's big three.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jochhejaam

Let's take a quick look at recent history. Pistons have made Indiana players, coaches and fans miserable for the last 2 years.
And you're more or less neutral? :lmao

---

Thay haven't upset me a bit. Pistons players did not put a gun to the heads of their opposite numbers on the Pacers and force them to choke in the 2004 ECF (when they were heavily favored). Ben Wallace didn't throw Artest into the stands. I have a very low opinion of Rasheed Wallace and Larry Brown, but I'm not biased against the Pistons. IMHO, the Pacers' problems have been entirely of their own making.

As a lifelong Cubs and Pacers fan, I have been forced to take a realistic view of sports. For example, the Cubs and Pacers aren't cursed; they just aren't good enough. Pacers fans make a lot of excuses, like how we were at our best when this fellow named Jordan was also doing quite well (or so I hear). The truth is we had clear shots when Jordan wasn't even in the league and didn't win it then, either.

If the Pacers are in the Finals, I'm not going to be objective. When it's Detroit and SA, I think I can do just fine. I mean, a moving screen is a moving screen.