Reply With Quote
@ okc and atlanta being ahead of us. ing terrible.
Top Trios In The NBA
SI.com
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 les. 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/mul...content.1.html
No way in that Atlanta and OKC have better big 3's than us. OKC is more just Durant and Westbrook and Atlanta? What the have they done to be ahead of us? Pathetic list.
Yeah, Atlanta and OKC ahead of the Big Three is laughable. , 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.
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.
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
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..
lol allen
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.
Durant/Westbrook, I can definitely see, but Jeff Green brings them down a few notches..
No. Jeff Green is horrible. He's like a black version of Bonner, but subs ute 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.
The Spurs should be third or fourth. The Hawks and the Thunder have no business being placed ahead of them.
LOL
The Spurs 'bout ta turn em inta quittas
lol another house list
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.
lol @ the pix
How exactly can a trio be rated if they haven't even played together?
TD+TP+MANU = better than everyone else
And the #1 trio has played together for two weeks.
/list
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.
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.
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.
Wow... ty list indeed
1. Lakers
2. Heat
3. Cs and Spurs
5. Bulls
6. Hawks
7. Jazz
8. Thunders
9. Hornets
10. Blazers
Pathetic.
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.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
