Poll: Best big 3 in NBA history

[greg683x]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

[Somebody]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

Ah okay. And I'll be one of the first guys to bring out the pitchforks , you'll have to really dig out new evidence to prove that Kobe was a sui generis offensive force (even among the ATGs) + he was an elite guard defender in the late 2000s to convince me that he was superior to prime LeBron lol. But I do respect your opinion

[greg683x]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

Ah okay. And I'll be one of the first guys to bring out the pitchforks , you'll have to really dig out new evidence to prove that Kobe was a sui generis offensive force (even among the ATGs) + he was an elite guard defender in the late 2000s to convince me that he was superior to prime LeBron lol. But I do respect your opinion

Whoa whoa whoa.  LeBron vs Kobe is a completely different discussion.  LeBrons great but that prime LeBron Miami Heat trio needed 7 games and ref screw job to beat a declining Pierce Garnett Allen trio.  And as much as LeBron might be better than Kobe, the front court of that Heat team would have been overwhelmed by the size of Bynum and Gasol.

I’d take the peak Garnett, Pierce, Allen team AND peak Bryant, Bynum, and Gasol over the LeBron Wade and Bosh trio.

Again though this could be a difference in the methodology of how me and you are looking at this.  If you’re just looking at the individual players then yes lebron wade and Bosh are much better players than Bryant Gasol and Bynum.  But the teams those players were on playing against each other, my money would go on LA

[Somebody]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

Ah okay. And I'll be one of the first guys to bring out the pitchforks , you'll have to really dig out new evidence to prove that Kobe was a sui generis offensive force (even among the ATGs) + he was an elite guard defender in the late 2000s to convince me that he was superior to prime LeBron lol. But I do respect your opinion

Whoa whoa whoa.  LeBron vs Kobe is a completely different discussion.  LeBrons great but that prime LeBron Miami Heat trio needed 7 games and ref screw job to beat a declining Pierce Garnett Allen trio.  And as much as LeBron might be better than Kobe, the front court of that Heat team would have been overwhelmed by the size of Bynum and Gasol.

I’d take the peak Garnett, Pierce, Allen team AND peak Bryant, Bynum, and Gasol over the LeBron Wade and Bosh trio.

Again though this could be a difference in the methodology of how me and you are looking at this.  If you’re just looking at the individual players then yes lebron wade and Bosh are much better players than Bryant Gasol and Bynum.  But the teams those players were on playing against each other, my money would go on LA

Yeah I'm just looking at the trio as players themselves while factoring in fit. I do penalise the Miami big three for having a pretty bad fit, but the talent is so good that it doesn't really matter unless they're facing the Warriors or Bulls.

[celts10]

If KG didn't get hurt in 2009, we likely would have won three straight championships against the Lakers.

[SparzWizard]

If KG didn't get hurt in 2009, we likely would have won three straight championships against the Lakers.

We'd beat the Lakers in 2009? The Lakers were borderline tough that season, I think we'd lost that year to them. They swept the Celtics that year with KG healthy.

But no doubt we'd beat them in 2010 if Perkins didn't get hurt and KG was healthy.

[boscel33]

A bit perplexed as to why the Steph-KD-Klay trio isn't getting any votes at all. You have a player who's a candidate for the title of GOAT offensive player and another perennial MVP favourite who's just a rung below those GOAT candidates on offence spearheading a trio with a perfect complementary All-NBA wing as their lackey - that trio is just insane lol.

Maybe because KD came after the 73 win season, yeah won a couple titles, but was never considered, on the outside, part of that team.  matter of fact, I might have listed it as Curry>Klay and either Draymond or Barnes.  People often forget about Barnes.

[boscel33]

So I went Parker>Manu>Duncan like this article says, although I had Bird>Parish>McHale #2, because the never missed the playoffs!

https://www.sportsbreak.com/nba/the-best-big-threes-in-nba-history/

[footey]

Which was the best big 3 in NBA history?

Honorable mentions

Walt Frazier - Willis Reed - Dave DeBusschere: Won 2 championships in the early '70s. Probably one of the most underrated trios ever.

Oscar Robertson - Bob Dandridge - Kareem (at the time Lew Alcindor): Oscar was 32 years old when they won the championship. Him and Kareem are legit GOAT candidates. Dandridge was nowhere near that level.

Dr J - Barkley - Moses: Played together for only 1 year. Lost to the C's in the ECF.

Isiah - Dumars - Laimbeer: With all due respect, the C's and the Lakers had better big 3s, at least imo.

Kobe - Shaq - whomever (probably Fisher) : Shaq and Kobe were amazing. The rest of the players were nowhere near the same level. 

Westbrook - Harden - Durant: Harden got traded way too soon.

Kyrie - LeBron - Love: Opted for the Miami big 3 instead.

*Could have included Hondo or Sam Jones over Tommy. Didn't include Hondo cause he wasn't around for the first 5 championships. Opted for Tommy over Sam Jones, cause I believe he was the better player during the Cousy era (at least from what I've read). In any case, the C's were loaded with HOFers at the time. Feel free to choose whomever 3 guys you want.

Having lived through the 60's Celtics and early 70's Knicks, proposing a "Big 3" for either of those makes absolutely no sense, and is contrary to what both of those teams stood for.

[Somebody]

Which was the best big 3 in NBA history?

Honorable mentions

Walt Frazier - Willis Reed - Dave DeBusschere: Won 2 championships in the early '70s. Probably one of the most underrated trios ever.

Oscar Robertson - Bob Dandridge - Kareem (at the time Lew Alcindor): Oscar was 32 years old when they won the championship. Him and Kareem are legit GOAT candidates. Dandridge was nowhere near that level.

Dr J - Barkley - Moses: Played together for only 1 year. Lost to the C's in the ECF.

Isiah - Dumars - Laimbeer: With all due respect, the C's and the Lakers had better big 3s, at least imo.

Kobe - Shaq - whomever (probably Fisher) : Shaq and Kobe were amazing. The rest of the players were nowhere near the same level. 

Westbrook - Harden - Durant: Harden got traded way too soon.

Kyrie - LeBron - Love: Opted for the Miami big 3 instead.

*Could have included Hondo or Sam Jones over Tommy. Didn't include Hondo cause he wasn't around for the first 5 championships. Opted for Tommy over Sam Jones, cause I believe he was the better player during the Cousy era (at least from what I've read). In any case, the C's were loaded with HOFers at the time. Feel free to choose whomever 3 guys you want.

Having lived through the 60's Celtics and early 70's Knicks, proposing a "Big 3" for either of those makes absolutely no sense, and is contrary to what both of those teams stood for.

I haven't lived through that era but yeah it's weird that those teams are on this list from what I've read, those teams were pretty balanced offensively.

Btw Footey what are your thoughts on the 60s Celtics? They obviously scored a ton of raw points, but their offensive efficiency was average at best during their 13 year run while their defence was transcendent. Do you think those Celtics team were an offensive juggernaut who helped Russell as much as he helped them, or do you think Russell made those players (not to say they were bad, but it was more like a transcendent talent surrounded by a bunch of good but not great players most of the time in the sense that his supporting cast never really had MVP calibre talent unless you think Cousy deserved his MVP by quarterbacking a slightly above average offence with Ed McCauley as his sidekick, as well as only having 2-3 guys who were All-NBA worthy throughout that entire 13 year run)?

[Androslav]

It is hard to pick one as these are all historic trios and each one built this league in their own way.

My personal favorites are '08 Celtics and SAS trio, they personified my ideas of how basketball should be played. Unselfishness, high intelligence, toughness, team-first mentality, and they were willing to sacrifice themselves for each other.

If I had to pick one that needs to fight the hostile incoming aliens, I would still probably pick the Bulls.
Hard to argue against a guy that never lost since he came to top.

GSW trio is definitely the one that made this, and probably the next 3 world generations of kids, to shoot the ball from outside with historic accuracy and volume. They would be my current holders of the "most influential trio trophy". But just until some new crazy good trio arrives.

[petbrick]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

Ah okay. And I'll be one of the first guys to bring out the pitchforks , you'll have to really dig out new evidence to prove that Kobe was a sui generis offensive force (even among the ATGs) + he was an elite guard defender in the late 2000s to convince me that he was superior to prime LeBron lol. But I do respect your opinion

Whoa whoa whoa.  LeBron vs Kobe is a completely different discussion.  LeBrons great but that prime LeBron Miami Heat trio needed 7 games and ref screw job to beat a declining Pierce Garnett Allen trio.  And as much as LeBron might be better than Kobe, the front court of that Heat team would have been overwhelmed by the size of Bynum and Gasol.

I’d take the peak Garnett, Pierce, Allen team AND peak Bryant, Bynum, and Gasol over the LeBron Wade and Bosh trio.

Again though this could be a difference in the methodology of how me and you are looking at this.  If you’re just looking at the individual players then yes lebron wade and Bosh are much better players than Bryant Gasol and Bynum.  But the teams those players were on playing against each other, my money would go on LA

This is a really interesting discussion, actually, because Gasol is massively underrated overall and Bynum's career is always going to be a giant question mark. And the styles of offense & defense are also pretty interesting to examine, as they played very different games.

[greg683x]

How does any of that have to do with whether they should be apart of this list?  Because they have too many good players?  Ron Artest averaged 11 pts a game and hit a big shot in the finals so it doesn’t count. He was a worse player than Rajon Rondo that season.  So should we take the Celtics big 3 down bc their other players were too good?

Should we remove the other big 3s that had role players hit game clinching shots in the finals?  Or bc the wrong player won MVP

In terms of instantly coming together to win a championship and transforming the entire culture of a somewhat woeful franchise at the time, the '08 Big 3 is probably #1. That's the obvious difference.

And that they should have won more

I don’t disagree with any of this.  As much as I love the ‘08 big 3, I’ll also say, this poll isn’t about which big 3 came together fastest and transformed a teams culture. 

Look I feel terrible because I feel like I’m being forced to knock one of my favorite teams of all time, the only point I’ve been trying to make is that the ‘08 Celtics arch rival, a team that won more titles, should probably be included on the list, especially considering there’s at least one team that’s clearly inferior to them (the Cavs).

That’s the only point I was trying to make, and some of the excuses being made here are a huge reach IMO

Oh you have a different methodology from mine. I was looking at a trio's peak year - namely the season a given triumvirate was at its best.

Ok fair enough, this is all opinionated, there’s no one right way to analyze all of this.

I was thinking of it more as a combination of number of titles, longevity, sustained success, level of competition, etc.  best peak years should factor in as well too like you said.

Given all of this, I was just making a point that the ‘08-‘10 lakers should at least make the list but by no means even sniff the top of it.

I do agree 110% that the peak of Garnett, Pierce, Allen are superior to Bryant, Gasol, Bynum.  I do still believe I’d at least put them on the list, I’d even dare to put them over LeBron, Wade, and Bosh, though I’m sure I’ll get murdered for that haha

Ah okay. And I'll be one of the first guys to bring out the pitchforks , you'll have to really dig out new evidence to prove that Kobe was a sui generis offensive force (even among the ATGs) + he was an elite guard defender in the late 2000s to convince me that he was superior to prime LeBron lol. But I do respect your opinion

Whoa whoa whoa.  LeBron vs Kobe is a completely different discussion.  LeBrons great but that prime LeBron Miami Heat trio needed 7 games and ref screw job to beat a declining Pierce Garnett Allen trio.  And as much as LeBron might be better than Kobe, the front court of that Heat team would have been overwhelmed by the size of Bynum and Gasol.

I’d take the peak Garnett, Pierce, Allen team AND peak Bryant, Bynum, and Gasol over the LeBron Wade and Bosh trio.

Again though this could be a difference in the methodology of how me and you are looking at this.  If you’re just looking at the individual players then yes lebron wade and Bosh are much better players than Bryant Gasol and Bynum.  But the teams those players were on playing against each other, my money would go on LA

This is a really interesting discussion, actually, because Gasol is massively underrated overall and Bynum's career is always going to be a giant question mark. And the styles of offense & defense are also pretty interesting to examine, as they played very different games.

Its a great topic and theres no one right answer, thats why hypothetical sports discussions are awesome.....if people can keep their emotions in check haha.

for me size always wins.  Those Heat teams would have stood no chance against either the Celtics or the Lakers.  It would have been a fun/competitive series to watch but the front court of Bosh and either Haslem/Joel Anthony would have been helpless against the length of both the Celtics and the Lakers. 

[Ogaju]

I really think the Kareem, Oscar, Dandridge team should be listed and not just an honorable mention.  Kareem was at his absolute best earlier in his career.  Oscar was older, but still just 32 and was still a 20/8/6 player (and was a 25 point scorer the year before without Kareem taking his shots).  Dandridge was just starting out but was already very good.  The Bucks just demolished everyone in the playoffs that year going 12-2 after winning 66 games in the regular season.  Oscar started showing his age the next season and they didn't get back to a title again, but that one season was impressive.

Fair enough. Can't argue with that.

-------------------------------------------------

Opted for Magic - Worthy - Kareem.

Imo, Magic is the GOAT.
Kareem is a legit GOAT candidate.
Worthy was an amazing player. I mean, he was the Finals MVP in 1988.

Magic and Kareem won 5 championships playing together. Worthy was a member of the team for 3 of those championships.

Obviously, Bird-McHale-Parish weren't half bad either. Hate to say it, but at the end of the day, 5 > 3.

but 3=3.

[gouki88]

I really think the Kareem, Oscar, Dandridge team should be listed and not just an honorable mention.  Kareem was at his absolute best earlier in his career.  Oscar was older, but still just 32 and was still a 20/8/6 player (and was a 25 point scorer the year before without Kareem taking his shots).  Dandridge was just starting out but was already very good.  The Bucks just demolished everyone in the playoffs that year going 12-2 after winning 66 games in the regular season.  Oscar started showing his age the next season and they didn't get back to a title again, but that one season was impressive.

Fair enough. Can't argue with that.

-------------------------------------------------

Opted for Magic - Worthy - Kareem.

Imo, Magic is the GOAT.
Kareem is a legit GOAT candidate.
Worthy was an amazing player. I mean, he was the Finals MVP in 1988.

Magic and Kareem won 5 championships playing together. Worthy was a member of the team for 3 of those championships.

Obviously, Bird-McHale-Parish weren't half bad either. Hate to say it, but at the end of the day, 5 > 3.

but 3=3.

Magic as the GOAT is somehow more of a mystery take than their 3 rings being better than the Celtics 3 rings