Quote:
Originally Posted by dougthonus
This is really an example of biased sampling of data. Basically every team except for Jordan's Bulls and the Detroit Pistons (really in all three title seasons) had dominant inside/outside combinations.
Look at the best player on title teams for the past 30 years:
(7) PG Magic(4), Billups(1), Isiah (2)
(9) SG Jordan (6), Wade (1), Kobe (2)
(4) SF Bird (3), Pierce (1)
(4) PF Duncan (4)
(6) C Shaq (3), Hakeem (2), Moses (1)
We can argue about Parker/Duncan and who was more important the last season, but I gave credit to Duncan. However, even so, you've got 10 total big men led titles with 4 players over 30 years accounting for those big men and 16 guard driven titles with six different players accounting for the guards. Given that Bird and Pierce were also perimeter driven players it makes more sense to put them in with the guards as well, and if you did so, it'd be 20 to 10.
Almost every title team in existence has a premier interior threat and an premier perimeter threat. How many teams won a title without a HOF caliber perimeter player?
Houston won one. Depending whether Parker / Billups get into the HOF, you can argue those guys as well, so you have a maximum of 6 champions without a HOF caliber perimeter player.
How many won without a HOF caliber interior player.
Bulls 3-6 (depending on whether Rodman gets in)
Pistons 0-3 (depending on Rodman/Rasheed/Big ben)
Lakers 0-2 (depending on Pau Gasol)
You have more players who've won by perimeter dominant players than interior dominant players. You have more players who've played the role as the dominant guy as a guard rather than as a big man. You have potentially more teams who've won without a dominant big man then have won without a dominant guard.
In conclusion, the best way to look at all this data is simply to say that you need elite players to win. It's best if those elite players play in different spots on the floor (one on the perimeter one on the interior).
However, I don't think that this case extends to Joakim Noah a whole lot. For one, he's no where near a HOF caliber big man, nor will he ever be a HOF caliber big man. Getting a guy like Carmelo Anthony who may be a HOF caliber wing player is far more likely to make us successful than having a non HOF caliber big man IMO, especially given that the Bulls do have an all-star caliber big man on the roster in terms of Boozer.
|
I did look at the other facts surrounding the issue. I didnt say the center is always the best player. As you said, hardly is the center the best player, especially lately. But a All-Star center paired with an All-Star perimeter player is what it takes to get the title. The Shaq-Wade, Duncan-Parker, Bird-Parish, Magic-Kareem, Kobe-Shaq combo's. An undersized PF does not work in this. And if you have crap at center (providing you dont have Jordan) you're not winning either. You can get there..plenty of teams have done that (Dallas, Cleveland, New Jersey, Knicks, Utah, Seattle, Phoenix, Portland are examples since 1990).
To me if we lost Noah for Carmelo, we are on par with ..the best example I can come up with is the 90's Sonics team. Detlef Schremphf is nowhere close to Carmelo, but Shawn Kemp was much better than Boozer is. Rose doesnt have the defensive capabilities of Gary Payton, but they're both All-Star PG's.
Boozer is undersized at PF and will be matched up against much bigger PF's in the playoffs that will dominate him if Boozer doesnt have help (Which happened in Utah). A player of Noah's capabilities takes pressure of Boozer on both ends of the court.
And obviously Noah will not likely make the Hall-of-Fame (Though if people are making a case for Rodman..one could be made for Noah if he managed to somehow become like Rodman [without Rodman's hothead]). But Noah being an All-Star or playing on an All-Star level to me increases our chances greatly.