The definitive list of the NBA's franchise guys (and others)

[DPG21920]

No he didn't.

Bull.

Memphis:

Shane Battier
Troy Bell
Pau Gasol
Ryan Humphrey
Dahntay Jones
Mike Miller
Bo Outlaw
Wesley Person
James Posey
Theron Smith
Stromile Swift
Jake Tsakalidis
Earl Watson
Jason Williams
Lorenzen Wright

NO:

Hilton Armstrong
Ryan Bowen
Devin Brown
Rasual Butler
Tyson Chandler
Antonio Daniels
Melvin Ely
Mike James
Sean Marks
Chris Paul
Morris Peterson
James Posey
Peja Stojakovic
David West
Julian Wright

Very comparable talent. 5 double digit scorers for Memphis, 4 for NO.

[ElNono]

I know that Rondo doesn't belong, but Ginobili doesn't belong on that list either. He has never lead an NBA team.

No, but he has led a team successfully that had a lot of NBA talent, past actual NBA talent. I would argue that in his better seasons he was a better player than about half of that Foundation players list.

The list is skewed severely anyways, since Derrick Rose is a great talent but he still has a lot to prove. A guy like melo is kind of the same thing. His team was not serious until Chauncey got there. The first list is entirely debatable, both on inclusions and ommisions.

And for the record, I do think CP3 is a franchise guy. The problem for him is that because of his size and the position he plays in, it's very though for him to really make a big difference on the defensive side. The last great Franchise PG was Magic, IMHO, but he was a lot bigger than Paul and also had better post players than what CP3 has.

I just wish he would cut down acting like a whiny .

[dirk4mvp]

It's comparable, but Pau's Grizzly teams had more balance.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

IMO, there is no such thing as a PG who can be deemed a "franchise player". In almost the last 20 years, no team has won a championship with a PG as its franchise go to player.

[redzero]

You keep saying: "who else would have led the Hornets to 49 wins...". Pau had a worse team and led them to 50. Does that make him a franchise player? I am saying you need to frame your arguments better.

Those are different situations, and Pau wouldn't have done trick for last year's Hornets.

Just because Manu has played with Duncan, doesn't mean he is automatically canceled out. I am not saying Manu should be there, but that is a weak argument.

He has done nothing to show that he is a franchise or foundation player at all. I know he played with Duncan, but he isn't that kind of player. He is a very good player, but to put him with some of the other players mentioned would be wrong.

If Paul came into the league with Duncan, he would be in the same boat as TP and Manu.

But this could apply to any player. One can speculate all they want, but in the end, we have to go on what we have.

[ElNono]

He has done nothing to show that he is a franchise or foundation player at all. I know he played with Duncan, but he isn't that kind of player. He is a very good player, but to put him with some of the other players mentioned would be wrong.

What do you mean he has done nothing to show he's a foundation player? He was one vote away from taking the NBA Finals MVP from Duncan, not to mention he was the Spurs leading scorer just two seasons ago.
He was an All-Star, All NBA 3rd team, NBA 6th man of the year.

If the meltdown we had last season without him doesn't tell you how good he is, I don't know what does.

[Findog]

IMO, there is no such thing as a PG who can be deemed a "franchise player". In almost the last 20 years, no team has won a championship with a PG as its franchise go to player.

Zeke - 1990. That was 19 years ago.

[Darthkiller]

so somehow steve nash 2 time mvp and nowitzski 1 time mvp arent franchise players yet chris paul is ? both nash and nowitzski have carried their team way better than paul did.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

another fixer.

Duncan was the best player on 4 legitimate championship teams. He didn't need Jameer Nelson or the refs to corn him on any one of the 4 either.

Give your TomDoll some more huggin.
And did you fix that patch securely after the thrashing you gave TomDoll post Denver debaucle?

What the are you talking about? I never said Kobe > Duncan, all I said was Kobe's last championship was won with him as the best player.

[ElNono]

Zeke - 1990. That was 19 years ago.

+1, and he was small too. But that team was tough as nails. No sissy Peja es there.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Zeke - 1990. That was 19 years ago.

I said almost 20 years because of Zeke....

[redzero]

What do you mean he has done nothing to show he's a foundation player? He was one vote away from taking the NBA Finals MVP from Duncan, not to mention he was the Spurs leading scorer just two seasons ago.
He was an All-Star, All NBA 3rd team, NBA 6th man of the year.

If the meltdown we had last season without him doesn't tell you how good he is, I don't know what does.

As I have stated before, he has never been the best player on his team. We haven't seen defenses build their game plans around him. We haven't seen how he would perform without Tim Duncan or Tony Parker around.

Being an All Star or 6th man doesn't automatically make one a franchise or foundation player.

[DPG21920]

So, if Manu had Tyson Chandler and David West and led them to 49 wins, he would be a franchise player in your eyes?

We have seen what Kobe could do without Shaq or Gasol, and it was not very much. Even franchise players need help to win. The good ones just need less.

[redzero]

So, if Manu had Tyson Chandler and David West and led them to 49 wins, he would be a franchise player in your eyes?

We have seen what Kobe could do without Shaq or Gasol, and it was not very much. Even franchise players need help to win. The good ones just need less.

If Manu could get 49 wins with Chandler missing 37 games and without anybody else besides West being able to create their own shot, I would be the first one on his bandwagon. Problem is, that would never happen in a thousand years. He simply doesn't have that kind of talent, and he never will.

[DPG21920]

Just trying to gauge your criteria.

[ElNono]

As I have stated before, he has never been the best player on his team. We haven't seen defenses build their game plans around him. We haven't seen how he would perform without Tim Duncan or Tony Parker around.

Being an All Star or 6th man doesn't automatically make one a franchise or foundation player.

I disagree. We have seen defenses planned around him. Larry Brown in '05, after the first two Finals games said as much. Same thing with Karl in Denver and D'Antoni while he was in Phoenix.
Now, if you didn't watch many Spurs games back then that's a different story altogether.

[ElNono]

If Manu could get 49 wins with Chandler missing 37 games and without anybody else besides West being able to create their own shot, I would be the first one on his bandwagon. Problem is, that would never happen in a thousand years. He simply doesn't have that kind of talent, and he never will.

Let's flip it around. If Paul would have played with Duncan and won 2 rings in the process, would you still think he's a franchise playe or even a foundation player?

[redzero]

Let's flip it around. If Paul would have played with Duncan and won 2 rings in the process, would you still think he's a franchise playe or even a foundation player?

Yes. It would have been like Kobe playing second fiddle with Shaq. Paul would probably put up better numbers with Tim's teammates than he did with the Hornets, too. It's not like playing with Timmy would prevent Paul from emerging as a franchise player. Talent like his just doesn't come and go like that.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

One of the funniest parts of this site are when the Manu homers try to argue Manu could be a franchise player on an NBA team.

[dirk4mvp]

One of the funniest parts of this site are when the Manu homers try to argue Manu could be a franchise player on an NBA team.

You must not know he was the #1 guy on some overseas teams.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

You must not know he was the #1 guy on some overseas teams.

O I forgot, he's basically the king of minor league basketball.

[ElNono]

Yes. It would have been like Kobe playing second fiddle with Shaq. Paul would probably put up better numbers with Tim's teammates than he did with the Hornets, too. It's not like playing with Timmy would prevent Paul from emerging as a franchise player. Talent like his just doesn't come and go like that.

I don't necessarily disagree, but I also think there would always be a cloud over it, much like Kobe until last season, when he won it without Shaq.
Guys like Duncan and Shaq were so dominant, that it cast a big shade around everyone that played around them. Unfortunately, I don't think it's fair for guys like Manu or Tony, which I think were(Manu) and still are(Tony) the true Foundation players for the Spurs.

Then again, we can debate this ad nauseum, and probably won't agree, and that's ok with me.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

Unfortunately, I don't think it's fair for guys like Manu or Tony, which I think were(Manu) and still are(Tony) the true Foundation players for the Spurs.

Are you saying the Spurs recent success has more to do with Manu and Tony than it does Duncan?

[ElNono]

Are you saying the Spurs recent success has more to do with Manu and Tony than it does Duncan?

The Spurs haven't had recent success.
But I will tell you that we wouldn't have won in 2005 or 2007 without Manu and Tony. I think all the other parts (except Duncan, obviously) had less of an impact.

That's why they call them the Big 3, not the Big 1.

And if you don't like Manu homers, you came to the wrong forum.
If it bothers you that much, feel free to go back to SunsTalk or MavsTalk or whatever you came from.

[DUNCANownsKOBE2]

The Spurs haven't had recent success.
But I will tell you that we wouldn't have won in 2005 or 2007 without Manu and Tony. I think all the other parts (except Duncan, obviously) had less of an impact.

That's why they call them the Big 3, not the Big 1.

And if you don't like Manu homers, you came to the wrong forum.
If it bothers you that much, feel free to go back to SunsTalk or MavsTalk or whatever you came from.

I said it's funny, I never said it bothered me.

And yeah, obviously the Spurs needed them to win and they were two of the top three players on the 2005 and 2007 team, all I'm saying is Duncan was the clear cut best player on both of those teams.