Poll: Best Player to Build a Franchise Around

[Goldstar88]

I chose Luka then instantly regretted it. Tatum is a fantastic defender, it more than makes up for what Luka has over Tatum offensively.

What does Luka have over Tatum offensively? He’s a better passer, but in terms of scoring, Jayson is more versatile and a better shooter.

[GreenEnvy]

To me it’s Tatum, Luka, and Giannis. In no particular order.

Depends what you fancy. I don’t think Giannis will ever shoot like Tatum. I don’t think Tatum will ever facilitate like Luka. I don’t think Luka will ever defend like Giannis. But they are all so good at so many things.

Tatum is probably the most complete, IMO. He’s got pretty no weaknesses whatsoever. We all know Giannis is a poor FT/3PT shooter. Luka is not a particularly strong FT shooter or defender.

While Giannis has the hardware, Tatum isn’t too far behind where he was at 24 years old (Giannis is gonna be 28 in a few weeks).

I think Tatum is entering the MVP picture now, and we’ve seen him come up huge multiple times in a Finals run.

Have to give honorable mention to guys like Embiid and Jokic. Not “old” at 28 and 27, respectively, but they don’t have the playoff success as Giannis nor the room for growth as Luka.

The more I think about it, the more I like Tatum over everyone. We know about his scoring. We know he can play elite defense and is a good rebounder. He also averages 4.4 assists last season. Is it inconceivable that he gets up towards 5.5-6 in his prime? That’s where Giannis is at. I know it’s early, but he’s more making nearly as many free throws a game as Giannis, too.

[Kernewek]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

[nickagneta]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

[Moranis]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

The best shot is still the shot at the rim.   Even for the greatest shooter ever it is about the same amount of points per 100 shots.  From 0-3' for his career Curry scores 128.4 points per 100 shots and from 3 he scores 129.6 points per 100 shots.  That doesn't account for fouls either, which are much easier to draw at the rim than from 3.  And that is the greatest 3 point shooter ever who is also a small guard.  Obviously it is easier to shoot a 3, but the best shot continues to be the shot at the rim. That isn't going to change.  If you have a big guy that can score at the rim, that is still the best winning play. 

[nickagneta]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

The best shot is still the shot at the rim.   Even for the greatest shooter ever it is about the same amount of points per 100 shots.  From 0-3' for his career Curry scores 128.4 points per 100 shots and from 3 he scores 129.6 points per 100 shots.  That doesn't account for fouls either, which are much easier to draw at the rim than from 3.  And that is the greatest 3 point shooter ever who is also a small guard.  Obviously it is easier to shoot a 3, but the best shot continues to be the shot at the rim. That isn't going to change.  If you have a big guy that can score at the rim, that is still the best winning play.

Don't care about any of that because the big man game is dead. Even the best in today's game have an overall weak arsenal of post moves that garner them tons of shots at the 0-3 foot range that aren't generally put back shots off misses. Even today's best big men, Embiid and Jokic, only get about 28% of their shots from the 0-3 foot range. Curry gets 14% of his shots from that range. Tatum 22%. So while it's the best shot, it's massively underutilized by modern centers who don't take all that many more shots from that range than guys that drive to the basket

The big man is a dinosaur. They're dying off. The future of the big man will be a guy that plays exactly the way Al Horford does right now or the way Bam Adebayo would if he took and made three pointers, but he doesn't.

[Roy H.]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

The best shot is still the shot at the rim.   Even for the greatest shooter ever it is about the same amount of points per 100 shots.  From 0-3' for his career Curry scores 128.4 points per 100 shots and from 3 he scores 129.6 points per 100 shots.  That doesn't account for fouls either, which are much easier to draw at the rim than from 3.  And that is the greatest 3 point shooter ever who is also a small guard.  Obviously it is easier to shoot a 3, but the best shot continues to be the shot at the rim. That isn't going to change.  If you have a big guy that can score at the rim, that is still the best winning play.

Don't care about any of that because the big man game is dead. Even the best in today's game have an overall weak arsenal of post moves that garner them tons of shots at the 0-3 foot range that aren't generally put back shots off misses. Even today's best big men, Embiid and Jokic, only get about 28% of their shots from the 0-3 foot range. Curry gets 14% of his shots from that range. Tatum 22%. So while it's the best shot, it's massively underutilized by modern centers who don't take all that many more shots from that range than guys that drive to the basket

The big man is a dinosaur. They're dying off. The future of the big man will be a guy that plays exactly the way Al Horford does right now or the way Bam Adebayo would if he took and made three pointers, but he doesn't.

One clarifying question:  is zero to three feet really operating in the post?  I had thought it extends beyond that range.  Hakeem and Ewing weren't great because they were constantly shooting from three feet, were they?  If you extend the criteria out to ten feet, Jokic shoots about 65.2% of his shots from within that distance, according to BBR.

I do agree that Embiid, Jokic, Towns, etc., are pulled away from the post a lot more than has traditionally been the case with big men.  I also wonder whether big men learning to shoot threes has been to their detriment, because huge, skilled centers should be able to dominate inside in this era.

[nickagneta]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

The best shot is still the shot at the rim.   Even for the greatest shooter ever it is about the same amount of points per 100 shots.  From 0-3' for his career Curry scores 128.4 points per 100 shots and from 3 he scores 129.6 points per 100 shots.  That doesn't account for fouls either, which are much easier to draw at the rim than from 3.  And that is the greatest 3 point shooter ever who is also a small guard.  Obviously it is easier to shoot a 3, but the best shot continues to be the shot at the rim. That isn't going to change.  If you have a big guy that can score at the rim, that is still the best winning play.

Don't care about any of that because the big man game is dead. Even the best in today's game have an overall weak arsenal of post moves that garner them tons of shots at the 0-3 foot range that aren't generally put back shots off misses. Even today's best big men, Embiid and Jokic, only get about 28% of their shots from the 0-3 foot range. Curry gets 14% of his shots from that range. Tatum 22%. So while it's the best shot, it's massively underutilized by modern centers who don't take all that many more shots from that range than guys that drive to the basket

The big man is a dinosaur. They're dying off. The future of the big man will be a guy that plays exactly the way Al Horford does right now or the way Bam Adebayo would if he took and made three pointers, but he doesn't.

One clarifying question:  is zero to three feet really operating in the post?  I had thought it extends beyond that range.  Hakeem and Ewing weren't great because they were constantly shooting from three feet, were they?

I do agree that Embiid, Jokic, Towns, etc., are pulled away from the post a lot more than has traditionally been the case with big men.  I also wonder whether big men learning to shoot threes has been to their detriment, because huge, skilled centers should be able to dominate inside in this era.

Ask Moranis. He's the one that used it as a defense for big man offense.

I still stand by my comment that modern bigs don't have very good established post games, are being pulled way out of the paint on both ends of the court and are a dying breed. I don't see any real proof that those statements aren't true. And it's why I would never start a franchise or center a franchise around a big, both on the court and in the salary cap. It's a losing proposition in the modern era if your goal is a title.

[Kernewek]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

Sure, but this presumes no rules changes to adjust the game - the rise of the three point shot arose based on rule changes, and it's silly to presume that the rules won't change as the game continues to evolve.

[nickagneta]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

Sure, but this presumes no rules changes to adjust the game - the rise of the three point shot arose based on rule changes, and it's silly to presume that the rules won't change as the game continues to evolve.

It's sillier to think the rules will change to promote more boring post play. Rules change to evolve the game and make it more entertaining. They don't change to regress it and make it more a brand people don't want to watch.

[boscel33]

Who are the three who voted for Towns/Markannen?

Voting is anonymous, LOL, but I'll admit, I voted for KAT as I said in my post.  Wings are a dime a dozen, but a big that does what he does, sold!

[Kernewek]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

Sure, but this presumes no rules changes to adjust the game - the rise of the three point shot arose based on rule changes, and it's silly to presume that the rules won't change as the game continues to evolve.

It's sillier to think the rules will change to promote more boring post play. Rules change to evolve the game and make it more entertaining. They don't change to regress it and make it more a brand people don't want to watch.

Ah but now we're getting very into the eye of the beholder here - no one is advocating for the return of the Mark Jackson backdown, necessarily, but is that better or worse? Hard to say.

Some examples that wouldn't necessarily 'promote more boring play':

Let's say the NBA makes good on eliminating the corner three

Or they adjust the defensive three second rule that killed the post game in the first place? The early 00's were boring because players' skillsets didn't match the new rules (the defensive three seconds rule was implemented for the 2001-2002 season. Surely you wouldn't say that the Pistons victory over the Lakers wasn't boring, even though it was largely played under a modern day ruleset?) not because of the inherent rules of the game.

[Moranis]

I see a # of posts saying Jokic is having a down season, but not really if you look at the #s.

61% from the field, 88% FT, his 3 % is down a little, but he's only taking 2 per game. He's taking almost 5 fewer shots per game than he did the previous 2 years. His scoring and rebounding are down because Denver has a healthy Porter and Murray, KCP added to the mix, and he's playing a little less.

When I think of building a franchise, I think next 10 years, even though with salary rules, we're always looking at 4-5 year windows at most. Taking a guy to build around, I'd automatically exclude Jokic, Embiid, and maybe even Freak. Big guys don't stay healthy as long. Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards, not big men. Any of those guys going to still be elite at 33? 35? Giannis maybe, because he's a freak of nature.

IMO, Freak is the best player in the league, but I'd take Luka or Tatum if I could have my pick of one guy. 10 years from now, Tatum and Luka will still be near the top of the league, barring misfortune. I have my doubts about the others.

The bolded is interesting, especially because height doesn't diminish as you age (in terms of being an active NBA player). Winning in the NBA is based on wings and guards right now, because we've just come out of a 10 year window of all time talent at the wing and guard position, but those all-timers are in their 30's and their replacements look to be a cut below. Go back 20 years instead of 10 and the argument for wings & guards isn't as much of a given.

Except wings and guards dominating the league, regardless of all-time quality, isn't going to change. The reason is the proliferation of the three point shot in the modern game and, centers and bigs in general, do not take or make three pointers at the rates and percentages as wings and guards do.

Three point percentage since the 1999-2000 year has remained fairly steady in the 35.8% range or so. But take a look at 3PA per game per team in 5 year intervals and then last year's complete numbers:

1999-2000: 13.7
2004-2005: 15.8
2009-2010: 18.1
2014-2015: 22.4
2019-2020: 34.1
2021-2022: 35.2

These numbers have increased at an amazing rate as has pace, which has gone from around 90 to around 100 in that time, as well as offensive rating, which has increased from  around 103 to around 112.

It's become a game where teams want their shots being either at the rim, at the three point line or at the free throw line. Those are the most efficient shots and it's easier for guards and wings that can hit the three pointer, drive and finish at the rim and hit free throws at a high percentages than it is for bigs.

Bigs simply can't and don't do that as well, in combination, as wings and guards, hence their diminished importance to the game. It's why I stated earlier, I wouldn't start my franchise building project with a center. They are dinosaurs into today's game unless they can hit threes, hit free throws and hit at the rim all at high rates, and are switchably versatile defensively and can guard smaller players at the perimeter.

The best shot is still the shot at the rim.   Even for the greatest shooter ever it is about the same amount of points per 100 shots.  From 0-3' for his career Curry scores 128.4 points per 100 shots and from 3 he scores 129.6 points per 100 shots.  That doesn't account for fouls either, which are much easier to draw at the rim than from 3.  And that is the greatest 3 point shooter ever who is also a small guard.  Obviously it is easier to shoot a 3, but the best shot continues to be the shot at the rim. That isn't going to change.  If you have a big guy that can score at the rim, that is still the best winning play.

Don't care about any of that because the big man game is dead. Even the best in today's game have an overall weak arsenal of post moves that garner them tons of shots at the 0-3 foot range that aren't generally put back shots off misses. Even today's best big men, Embiid and Jokic, only get about 28% of their shots from the 0-3 foot range. Curry gets 14% of his shots from that range. Tatum 22%. So while it's the best shot, it's massively underutilized by modern centers who don't take all that many more shots from that range than guys that drive to the basket

The big man is a dinosaur. They're dying off. The future of the big man will be a guy that plays exactly the way Al Horford does right now or the way Bam Adebayo would if he took and made three pointers, but he doesn't.

One clarifying question:  is zero to three feet really operating in the post?  I had thought it extends beyond that range.  Hakeem and Ewing weren't great because they were constantly shooting from three feet, were they?  If you extend the criteria out to ten feet, Jokic shoots about 65.2% of his shots from within that distance, according to BBR.

I do agree that Embiid, Jokic, Towns, etc., are pulled away from the post a lot more than has traditionally been the case with big men.  I also wonder whether big men learning to shoot threes has been to their detriment, because huge, skilled centers should be able to dominate inside in this era.

Embiid hits 73.1% from 0-3' for his career, but he takes just 28.0% of his shots from that range.  That shooting percentage compares favorably to someone like Shaq who shot 74.5% from 0-3' for most of his career (the shooting stats on bball-ref start with the 96-97 season), but Shaq attempted a whopping 50.9% of his shots from that range.

So I do think there is merit in your point, that guys like Embiid that are so focused on the 3 pointer are missing the forest through the trees.  You are a massive 7 foot man, go into the paint and dominate. 

As I said, bball-ref only has the shooting stats starting in the 96-97, which is why I used Shaq (since it was most of his career) as opposed to Hakeem or Ewing. 

[Roy H.]

Eye of the beholder, indeed.  I like post play more than watching teams missing 60%+ of their outside shots.

The most fun era of basketball to watch, for me, was the 80s.  I didn't consider games back then to be boring.

[Vermont Green]

Interesting debate, big vs. wing.  I will just say that if you go back through the last 10-15 champions, there are a lot of teams where the best player was a big.

Giannis  2021
Davis/James  2020
Durant  2017/2018
James  2016
Duncan  2007/2014
Nowitzki   2011
Garnett  2008

Now I understand that when you consider LeBron James and Kevin Durant, they aren't exactly bigs, certainly not back to their basket bigs, but they aren't exactly just wings either.  But it is not accurate to say that you can't win a championship with a big as the best player.  Or that it is the wrong way to build a team.  Or that you absolutely need a top wing.  In reality, you need both.  A big needs at least an all star level wing and vice verse.

I see nothing categorically wrong with choosing to build your team around a big.  Also nothing wrong with going with the best wing in the league.  The big today is likely not a back to the basket type anyway.  Giannis isn't.  Jokic isn't.  But there is plenty a top big can bring to a team.