Top Trios In The NBA

[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 mother ers 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]

@ okc and atlanta being ahead of us. ing terrible.

there is much worst than that !!!! @ 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 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


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

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


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

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

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

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

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mul...content.1.html

[johnnySpurs]

Two issues with this list.

1) It's theoretical
2) It's ed

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' le.

[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 ed

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' le.

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 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 compe ion 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 compe ion 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. les 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 le 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 les, however, was he good enough to be considered in an actual "big 3"?..

The Celtics won their only le 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. les 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 in NBA is Tony, Tim and Manu