I have a hard time believing Shaq could guard out to the 3 point line (even slimmer 96 Shaq). Same with older Hakeem and DRob. Even Barkley and Malone would struggle staying with guys like Durant. Now obviously the modern team would just have to throw bodies at Shaq, DRob, and Hakeem in the paint, but I think that is where someone like Dwight Howard could still be very effective. And if the 96 team can have Hakeem, why can't the modern team have Embiid or Giannis? Even without one of those guys, I wouldn't count this team out
PG - Curry, Lillard
SG - Harden, Butler, Brown
SF - Durant, Leonard
PF - James, Sabonis, Williamson
C - Davis, Howard
I think that team would handle itself pretty well. The 3 point shooting would be a real problem for the 96 team as really only Miller, Richmond, and Stockton were good shooters from the old guys. And the modern team would dominate the SG's and SF's on both ends of the floor.
I respect the attempt at being a contrarian, but Howard is hardly a good enough defender at this point to slow down any of the 96 Team's big men.
And, no, Scottie Pippen would not be "dominated at both ends of the floor".
1996 Grant Hill was a phenomenal player on the wing. He would not have been dominated on both ends either.
Gotta remember, that was pre-injury Grant who was putting up 20 points, 10 rebounds and 7 assists a game while playing great defense. Without that injury, Hill may have gone on to be a top 25-30 player all-time.
Hill was definitely very good, but he also did that over 41 mpg and a TS% of 53.7% (his eFG% was 46.4%). Per 36 he was basically 18/8.5/6.
This past season, Durant per 36 was 29.3/7.7/6.1 with a eFG% of 60.8% and a TS% 66.6%. And Leonard per 36 was 26.2/6.8/5.5 with a eFG% pf 56.8 and a TS% of 62.2.
So when I say the modern guys would dominate, it isn't because I don't think Pippen or Hill were great players, because they were, they just don't measure up to Durant and Leonard. I mean Durant imo is the 3rd greatest SF of all time behind only James and Bird, and at least talent wise you could probably put Leonard 4th (I'd have him behind Dr. J from a talent/career standpoint and behind Pippen from a career standpoint, but I think you could argue Kawhi is right there).
It seems very weird to use per-minute stats when the pace was so different. Per 100 possessions Grant averaged 31/13/10.5, Durant averaged 39/10/8. Durant is obviously the premier scorer and miles ahead as a shooter, but Grant at his peak was the superior passer, rebounder and perimeter defender. Turned it over less, fouled more and blocked shots less.
Durant also has no durability nowadays. I think that's worth considering with the physicality he'd be up against. Durant has the edge, no doubt, but it's not this chasm that you make it out to be
You are using 96-97, nick used 95-96, not a lot different, but we should at least be consistent in using the season before the Olympics and not the season after.
Full season durability doesn't matter since we are talking about a 7 game series, not a full season. I think Durant would hold up just fine in a 7 game series with at least 1 day off between every game. We saw that this season, twice, including one of the better series a player has had in a 7 game series (even in a loss). Despite playing more minutes against better competition, Durant actually upped his scoring and rebounding totals per 100 possessions from the regular to post-season.
Pippen and Hill are all time great players, but if this was a historical draft for a 7 game series based on the current season and the 95-96 season, Durant would go 1 and Leonard would go 2, with Pippen and Hill going 3 and 4. That isn't a controversial statement. And if you included Lebron at SF, the modern guys would have the 3 top SF's taken. Durability concerns could certainly affect a full season run for all 3 of the current guys, but not when you are picking guys for a 7 game series.
The 96 squad would probably be favored just because of the 3 centers, but with 3 point shooting what it is, I certainly wouldn't count out the modern team. That is the point I've been making. 3 is worth more than 2. And even Roy has his math wrong. If the big guys shoot 60% down low, that is equivalent to shooting 40% from 3. So the advantage just isn't as big as it seems. And only Shaq (at least at that point in time) was a surefire 60% or better shooter from 0-3 feet and he wasn't yet the prime-Shaq that hit them at better than 75% (he was in the mid-60's in his Orlando days). A fast paced, up and down the floor, 3 point shooting centered game would favor a modern team just because they are used to playing that style. I just don't think the 96 team could run with them. They'd dominate the half court because of the centers, but would struggle immensely on the other end and in transition. The game is just played differently today and not just shooting, just in general.
Topic: 96 Dream team vs All USA team today (Read 4335 times)