Building a NBA Franchise right now...Who would you take

[m33p0]

I guess Josh Smith is the next great big man then.

isn't it telling how shallow the talent pool is when it comes to centers?

[Chieflion]

Whatever, big men more important. Wasn't it easy to even pinpoint the starting and reserve centers for the ASG this season? How many point guards actually got snubbed or close to making all star game. This isn't even an argument.

[DPG21920]

Relevant article about this discussion:




I'm from the Philadelphia area. And I'm tired of the debate I'm having with Sonny Hill, a local sportscaster, about the relative merits of certain players. For example, Mr. Hill says that Michael Jordan couldn't match Wilt Chamberlain's dominance of the league. He also claims that Oscar Robertson was better than MJ. What's your take? — John Randall, Camden, NJ

Before evaluating a player's "dominance", the term has to be defined. Is it about numbers? Or championships?

If the former is the measure, than Wilt was more dominant than any other player in NBA history. But, if the latter definition is employed, since Wilt won only two championships (Philadelphia 1967, LA Lakers 1972), and was on the losing side in three other finals (1969, 1970, and 1973 with the LAL), his dominance was somewhat limited.

Jordan, on the other hand, won six NBA les and triumphed in every championship series in which he played. To me, rings are much more indicative of dominance than mere numbers. So my vote goes to MJ over Wilt.

On the other hand, comparing Jordan and the Big O is a much more complicated issue. Robertson was appreciably stronger, a much better rebounder and passer, and a more effective post-up scorer. Also, O was more of a perfectionist when it came to executing offensive plays than MJ ever was.

Jordan was somewhat quicker, and had better shooting range — but only because the 3-point line was in effect during his career. MJ was also a slightly better defender. In truth, Jordan's biggest advantage is that he could fly higher than Robertson.

However, since Robertson was a point guard and Jordan was a wing, no meaningful comparisons are possible

http://msn.foxsports.com/nba/story/9...ron%27s-flaws?

[DAF86]

The big man, always the big man.

[jdiggy0424]

dwight howard

look how bad the hornets are with cp3 gone blowing a lead against the blazers. You put the focus on a point guard and he goes down with injury then the team would suffer a lot worse.

plus most nba championship teams were built along a dominant center except for michael.

sorry but d howard is the most logical option

[jdiggy0424]

Celtics won without a big man.

celtics had parish mchale and walton (great when healthy)

[Tully365]

The original debate here was Center vs. Point Guard, so it doesn't seem right that the topic of MJ keeps coming up. I would argue that a very good and versatile SG is more important than a good PG, so using MJ as an example doesn't really work for the original discussion. Also, I think using MJ as a "typical" example of a guard doesn't work at all-- it's not like many typical guards are similar or close to Jordan-- he was far and away the best. With guys like Duncan, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Chamberlain, etc., there's lots of honest debate about who's better. I don't think that's generally the case with Jordan and other SGs.

Also, I think it's important to remember that the year after Jordan first retired, his Bulls won 55 games, so that was a pretty damn good team even without Jordan.

[phyzik]

Take the big man, Dwight. Look how many good... even just decent.... point guards there are in the NBA today....

Look how many good Big men there are in the NBA today....

You take the rare commodity if its offered to you. Serviceable point guards are a dime a dozen and a good big man at center will make a serviceable point guard look great.