2023 CS Historic Draft - How's My Team?

[Roy H.]

The Magic were 41-41 the year before McGrady and Hill.  The 4 years with TMac they won 43, 44, 42, and 21 games.  That 21 game season, with McGrady led to Dwight. They won 36 games in Dwight's rookie year (with Hill and Francis). In Dwight's 5th year they won 59 and were in the Finals improving every year to that point.  Dwight = winner.  TMac not so much.  Also, the Rockets were a 45 win team before McGrady, he bumped them a whooping 6 games up to 51 wins. Injuries the next year led to 34 wins. They got as high as 55, but never out of the 1st round. Heck McGrady's last full season he got hurt and played just 35 games, the team won 53 and made the 2nd round without him and without replacing him. They just didn't have him available and they won a playoff series.  And Toronto in the season after he left had the most wins in franchise history to that point and made the 2nd round.  All it took was the loser McGrady to leave.

There is not a bigger loser in the entire history of the sport than McGrady.  He had 3 different situations, playing with HOFers in each stop and couldn't even get out of the 1st round. The teams got better almost immediately after he left (or in Houston's case when he got hurt).

You and Roy don't like McGrady. Fair. Plenty of posters whose opinions are equally astute think McGrady is a powerhouse in this league.

They recognize that if you remove all the top 75 guys, suddenly most of the guys who reduced McGrady to a 1st round exit are gone. The 3-5 guys ahead of McGrady in MVP voting those 3 years? Gone. Who is left?

Well, your best guy is Pau Gasol, who didn't do anything more than McGrady did until he hitched himself to a top 15 player. Your 2nd pick was Amare, he wasn't the best player on his teams ever, it was Nash and Melo, and those teams did equal/worse than Thompson's, who in fact was the best player on his team.

My team also isn't overly reliant on McGrady. Several posters have said I have a top bench in the league. As previously mentioned, I've got 3 starters who were the best player on a WCF, a WCF, and a 1st/2nd round team. And then front court bench players who aren't far off from your starters. Blake #3 in MVP, Brad D top 11 in MVP 3 years in a row.

So feel free to denigrate McGrady. Other posters will see you don't have anyone better, and I'm very happy with my #2 thru #12.

No need to lash out or get defensive when others critique your team.  People have different opinions.

[Moranis]

McGrady wasn't losing to all time great players in the post season. His 1 playoff season in Toronto they lost to the Knicks with 37 year old Ewing (good enough to beat TMac but not good enough to count as a HOF teammate apparently) and only eligible players in this.  Orlando they lost to the Ray Allen Bucks (only Ray ineligible), the Baron Davis Hornets (all eligible players), the pre-Sheed Pistons (with all eligible players),  and then 21 wins before going to Houston. Now they did lose to the pre-Kidd, Dirk Mavs, then missed the playoffs, then lost to the DWill/Boozer Jazz 2 seasons in a row (all eligible), and then McGrady gets hurt and the Yao Rockets beat the Aldridge/Roy Blazers before losing to Kobe/Pau Lakers.

McGrady was an incredible talent, but he was a selfish loser that didn't put in the work. He didn't care and he didn't try.  It is why despite all that talent, he couldn't beat inferior talented teams in the playoffs, even while playing with other HOFers himself.  And that is why he is even eligible in this and not on the 75 team himself.

As for Pau, the Lakers won 42 games and lost in the 1st round. They acquired Pau and went to 3 straight Finals, winning the last 2 his first 3 years there. I'll give you he didn't win much in Memphis in the playoffs, but the Grizz were actually playing all time greats losing to the Spurs, Suns, and then Mavs. And unlike TMac there were no HOFers on his team. In fact, the only all stats he played with were Eddie Jones' at age 34 and 35, and Lowry during his rookie year. That's it.  The fact that he pulled that collection of geabage to the playoffs at all is a testament to his leadership and winning mentality. Not to mention all the top level international success. There is no contest between Pau and McGrady in that regard. Pau is a winner, Tracy is a loser.

[smokeablount]

The Magic were 41-41 the year before McGrady and Hill.  The 4 years with TMac they won 43, 44, 42, and 21 games.  That 21 game season, with McGrady led to Dwight. They won 36 games in Dwight's rookie year (with Hill and Francis). In Dwight's 5th year they won 59 and were in the Finals improving every year to that point.  Dwight = winner.  TMac not so much.  Also, the Rockets were a 45 win team before McGrady, he bumped them a whooping 6 games up to 51 wins. Injuries the next year led to 34 wins. They got as high as 55, but never out of the 1st round. Heck McGrady's last full season he got hurt and played just 35 games, the team won 53 and made the 2nd round without him and without replacing him. They just didn't have him available and they won a playoff series.  And Toronto in the season after he left had the most wins in franchise history to that point and made the 2nd round.  All it took was the loser McGrady to leave.

There is not a bigger loser in the entire history of the sport than McGrady.  He had 3 different situations, playing with HOFers in each stop and couldn't even get out of the 1st round. The teams got better almost immediately after he left (or in Houston's case when he got hurt).

You and Roy don't like McGrady. Fair. Plenty of posters whose opinions are equally astute think McGrady is a powerhouse in this league.

They recognize that if you remove all the top 75 guys, suddenly most of the guys who reduced McGrady to a 1st round exit are gone. The 3-5 guys ahead of McGrady in MVP voting those 3 years? Gone. Who is left?

Well, your best guy is Pau Gasol, who didn't do anything more than McGrady did until he hitched himself to a top 15 player. Your 2nd pick was Amare, he wasn't the best player on his teams ever, it was Nash and Melo, and those teams did equal/worse than Thompson's, who in fact was the best player on his team.

My team also isn't overly reliant on McGrady. Several posters have said I have a top bench in the league. As previously mentioned, I've got 3 starters who were the best player on a WCF, a WCF, and a 1st/2nd round team. And then front court bench players who aren't far off from your starters. Blake #3 in MVP, Brad D top 11 in MVP 3 years in a row.

So feel free to denigrate McGrady. Other posters will see you don't have anyone better, and I'm very happy with my #2 thru #12.

No need to lash out or get defensive when others critique your team.  People have different opinions.

I didn’t mean to lash out. In the first paragraph I said your opinions were both fair and astute, just that others and I disagree.

I was defending my team after a bunch of McGrady critiques, apologies if I took it too far, but I’m not exactly sure what I did that went over the line. “You don’t have anyone better” I guess sounds petty, but I think McGrady is better than Pau or Amare.

EDIT - after re-reading the posts and the sequence, I stand by the logic and my arguments, but it appears the stress of my day seeped into my commentary. I have greatly enjoyed my first draft and don’t want to bring conflict or tension into what has been a great experience. I do apologize if that’s what I did. It’s all in good fun.

[smokeablount]

And unlike TMac there were no HOFers on his team.

I picked McGrady 02-03. Who was the HoF that year? 29 games of Grant Hill? Who was the HoF in McGradys other Orlando years, and how many games did this person play?

If it’s not Grant Hill I’ve missed them and I’d like to know who it is.

If it is Grant Hill, I’d like to know why he gets to miss 50+ games and the playoffs but you count him as mcGradys HOF teammate that year, but Lanier missed 20 games and dominates the playoffs but it’s a liability. I’m afraid it’s just not consistent logic.

[Moranis]

And unlike TMac there were no HOFers on his team.

I picked McGrady 02-03. Who was the HoF that year? 29 games of Grant Hill? Who was the HoF in McGradys other Orlando years, and how many games did this person play?

If it’s not Grant Hill I’ve missed them and I’d like to know who it is.

If it is Grant Hill, I’d like to know why he gets to miss 50+ games and the playoffs but you count him as mcGradys HOF teammate that year, but Lanier missed 20 games and dominates the playoffs but it’s a liability. I’m afraid it’s just not consistent logic.

In 2003, the Magic were up 3-1 in the playoffs, and then McGrady promptly went a combined 26-72 (36%) and was -56 over those 3 games.  Game 5 was so bad, the Magic scored 67 points as a team, they got blown out at home in game 6, and then McGrady shot 29.2% from the field in game 7. 

That is the year you chose.  A year with one of the biggest playoff choke jobs in history and downright terrible play.  And that was a very young Detroit team, but one that had Rip, Chauncey, and Ben, 3 guys that did what it took to win and who all stepped up big when the team needed them to. 

TMac is one of the most talented players in history, he just doesn't have that special something that separates the talented players from the true greats. 

[Who]

I always forget that McGrady played for Atlanta (and Detroit) towards the end of his career. His body is shot. His game is limited. But it is still fun to watch him play. So see his brain at work. To watch him utilize his passing & ball-handling skills to setup others for baskets.

[gouki88]

And unlike TMac there were no HOFers on his team.

I picked McGrady 02-03. Who was the HoF that year? 29 games of Grant Hill? Who was the HoF in McGradys other Orlando years, and how many games did this person play?

If it’s not Grant Hill I’ve missed them and I’d like to know who it is.

If it is Grant Hill, I’d like to know why he gets to miss 50+ games and the playoffs but you count him as mcGradys HOF teammate that year, but Lanier missed 20 games and dominates the playoffs but it’s a liability. I’m afraid it’s just not consistent logic.

In 2003, the Magic were up 3-1 in the playoffs, and then McGrady promptly went a combined 26-72 (36%) and was -56 over those 3 games.  Game 5 was so bad, the Magic scored 67 points as a team, they got blown out at home in game 6, and then McGrady shot 29.2% from the field in game 7. 

That is the year you chose.  A year with one of the biggest playoff choke jobs in history and downright terrible play.  And that was a very young Detroit team, but one that had Rip, Chauncey, and Ben, 3 guys that did what it took to win and who all stepped up big when the team needed them to. 

TMac is one of the most talented players in history, he just doesn't have that special something that separates the talented players from the true greats.

You could probably do with walking back the HoF teammate criticism though

[Kernewek]

They recognize that if you remove all the top 75 guys, suddenly most of the guys who reduced McGrady to a 1st round exit are gone. The 3-5 guys ahead of McGrady in MVP voting those 3 years? Gone. Who is left?

This is an interesting point overall, and one that I've been considering when crafting my explainer. In my mind's eye, I see this as kind of a post-all star break to playoffs stretch: So all the teams are playing each other for 25-30 games and then it's a luck of the draw in the playoffs, where you'll be matched against one of the teams.

In other words, the historic (and full) regular season is useful for a data point as to relative performance (and same with the actual playoffs), but as a thought experiment it doesn't necessarily ding a player if they ran into, say, the Shaqobe Lakers during the 2000-01 - since they (the Lakers) only lost one game the whole way through, the sweep doesn't stand as a massive character flaw the same way it would if they'd been swept by an 8th Seed Miami Heat team.

That said, I do think TMac, like a Big Mac, is a dish with a fair amount of empty calories. Absolutely gifted player, but can he boost the team? Could you live healthily on a steady diet of TMac? I actually sort of see this roster as having that problem overall. Deron Williams admittedly didn't want to be "the guy" on the super team in Brooklyn, and... that leaves us with Larry Nance Sr to carry the squad? Hm.

[Kernewek]

Breaking it into a second post because I want to start getting my thoughts on the different teams down:



Chicago (smokeablount):
PG: Deron Williams (07-08) / Micheal Ray Richardson (80-81) / John Wall (16-17)
SG: David Thompson (77-78) / Hersey Hawkins (96-97)
SF: Tracy McGrady (02-03) / Tayshaun Prince (04-05)
PF: Larry Nance Sr (91-92) / Blake Griffin (13-14)
C: Bob Lanier (76-77) / Brad Daugherty (92-93) / Marcus Camby (06-07)

Beyond What I've said already:
The bench is absolutely insane - in many ways, I wish there was some swaps here, because I undervalue 70's guys and think you could move T-Mac to the SG spot and start Tayshaun at the three to exploit the mismatches, but on the other hand...

08 Deron Williams as the engine makes your starters look like Lob City on steroids. Thompson, Nance, Lanier running the floor with McGrady and D-Will makes this start to look like those old NBA 2K games where you could run an alley oop every play. I get the attraction.

What I worry about, then, is outside shooting, specifically from the two - you have a starting SG who can't shoot the three and doesn't pass particularly well.  I guess that's ok if you have TMac at the three, but none of those guys are really going to be very excited about guarding anyone? It's a lot of cleanup for your bigs, who I suspect you'd want to have rim-running?



Utah (wdleehi):
PG: Tony Parker / Sam Cassell
SG: Joe Johnson / Dale Ellis
SF: Grant Hill / Latrell Sprewell / Sean Elliott
PF: Chris Bosh / Larry Johnson / Robert Horry
C: Artis Gilmore / Kevin Willis

Man, I love this team. Kind of. I think you've built a really good starting five around Grant Hill, with some guys who were very happy not being the best player on the team (Healthy Grant is clearly the superstar here) - but I wonder about Joe Johnson's effectiveness as a... fourth option? Also I'm not sure the rest of your team wants to run with The A-Train, so I do wonder a little about the fit here.

Hard to say a little more without specific seasons, so I'll add more as that appears.

Memphis (celticinorlando):
PG: Kemba Walker (18-19) / Jamal Crawford (07-08)
SG: Vince Carter (00-01) / Michael Cooper (86-87) / Gail Goodrich (77-78)
SF: Alex English (82-83) / Antawn Jamison (00-01) / Josh Smith (11-12)
PF: LaMarcus Aldridge (14-15) / Horace Grant (93-94)
C: Yao Ming (08-09) / Bill Laimbeer (85-86)

This is the top And-1 mixtape team in the league, probably. So much scoring. So much athleticism. So little defence? Front-court feels a bit plodding as well - as automatic as Yao was, isn't he a little redundant with LMA? Horace Grant on the bench to stretch the floor is solid, and Vinsanity is half-man half-amazing, but is he going to thrive with a high-usage Kemba and Alex English year?

[Moranis]

And unlike TMac there were no HOFers on his team.

I picked McGrady 02-03. Who was the HoF that year? 29 games of Grant Hill? Who was the HoF in McGradys other Orlando years, and how many games did this person play?

If it’s not Grant Hill I’ve missed them and I’d like to know who it is.

If it is Grant Hill, I’d like to know why he gets to miss 50+ games and the playoffs but you count him as mcGradys HOF teammate that year, but Lanier missed 20 games and dominates the playoffs but it’s a liability. I’m afraid it’s just not consistent logic.

In 2003, the Magic were up 3-1 in the playoffs, and then McGrady promptly went a combined 26-72 (36%) and was -56 over those 3 games.  Game 5 was so bad, the Magic scored 67 points as a team, they got blown out at home in game 6, and then McGrady shot 29.2% from the field in game 7. 

That is the year you chose.  A year with one of the biggest playoff choke jobs in history and downright terrible play.  And that was a very young Detroit team, but one that had Rip, Chauncey, and Ben, 3 guys that did what it took to win and who all stepped up big when the team needed them to. 

TMac is one of the most talented players in history, he just doesn't have that special something that separates the talented players from the true greats.

You could probably do with walking back the HoF teammate criticism though

I mean all I said was he had HOF teammates at all 3 stops in his prime years.  That is true. Obviously Hill was hurt a lot and Ewing was old, but they are still HOfers and were his teammates in Orlando.  And as I pointed out, it isn't like McGrady was running into the super teams in those 1st round losses.  If McGrady was that good they would have won some of those series.  I mean the year Ewing, Horace Grant, Darrell Armstrong, and Mike Miller were on the team and they lost to Baron Davis, Jamaal Magloire, David Wesley, Elden Campbell, and PJ Brown, the last 3 were seasons into their 30's and Magloire was in his 2nd year.  The Magic got blown out at home to end the series (TMac was excellent offensively in the game, but he was a sieve on the defensive end).  They also lost the prior game at home giving up a whooping 18 points in overtime to lose by 10.  And in that overtime, McGrady didn't take a single shot ending it with 0 points, 1 rebound, 1 assist, and 1 foul.

[Roy H.]

The Magic were 41-41 the year before McGrady and Hill.  The 4 years with TMac they won 43, 44, 42, and 21 games.  That 21 game season, with McGrady led to Dwight. They won 36 games in Dwight's rookie year (with Hill and Francis). In Dwight's 5th year they won 59 and were in the Finals improving every year to that point.  Dwight = winner.  TMac not so much.  Also, the Rockets were a 45 win team before McGrady, he bumped them a whooping 6 games up to 51 wins. Injuries the next year led to 34 wins. They got as high as 55, but never out of the 1st round. Heck McGrady's last full season he got hurt and played just 35 games, the team won 53 and made the 2nd round without him and without replacing him. They just didn't have him available and they won a playoff series.  And Toronto in the season after he left had the most wins in franchise history to that point and made the 2nd round.  All it took was the loser McGrady to leave.

There is not a bigger loser in the entire history of the sport than McGrady.  He had 3 different situations, playing with HOFers in each stop and couldn't even get out of the 1st round. The teams got better almost immediately after he left (or in Houston's case when he got hurt).

You and Roy don't like McGrady. Fair. Plenty of posters whose opinions are equally astute think McGrady is a powerhouse in this league.

They recognize that if you remove all the top 75 guys, suddenly most of the guys who reduced McGrady to a 1st round exit are gone. The 3-5 guys ahead of McGrady in MVP voting those 3 years? Gone. Who is left?

Well, your best guy is Pau Gasol, who didn't do anything more than McGrady did until he hitched himself to a top 15 player. Your 2nd pick was Amare, he wasn't the best player on his teams ever, it was Nash and Melo, and those teams did equal/worse than Thompson's, who in fact was the best player on his team.

My team also isn't overly reliant on McGrady. Several posters have said I have a top bench in the league. As previously mentioned, I've got 3 starters who were the best player on a WCF, a WCF, and a 1st/2nd round team. And then front court bench players who aren't far off from your starters. Blake #3 in MVP, Brad D top 11 in MVP 3 years in a row.

So feel free to denigrate McGrady. Other posters will see you don't have anyone better, and I'm very happy with my #2 thru #12.

No need to lash out or get defensive when others critique your team.  People have different opinions.

I didn’t mean to lash out. In the first paragraph I said your opinions were both fair and astute, just that others and I disagree.

I was defending my team after a bunch of McGrady critiques, apologies if I took it too far, but I’m not exactly sure what I did that went over the line. “You don’t have anyone better” I guess sounds petty, but I think McGrady is better than Pau or Amare.

EDIT - after re-reading the posts and the sequence, I stand by the logic and my arguments, but it appears the stress of my day seeped into my commentary. I have greatly enjoyed my first draft and don’t want to bring conflict or tension into what has been a great experience. I do apologize if that’s what I did. It’s all in good fun.

It's definitely hard to judge somebody's tone, etc., on the internet.  It just seemed like when Mo and I critiqued your team, you reflexively "attacked back" by criticizing our teams.  In the past, that type of stuff has led to p---ing contests.

I think that you've assembled a really interesting team.  In terms of pure talent, I think you're at or neat the top of the league.  But, I tend to prefer teams built more like the 2004 Pistons, or the Spurs dynasty (led, of course, by Manu Ginobili, haha).  Great defense, great passing, great chemistry, grit and grind.

But, my opinion isn't the consensus, or even the majority view.  For instance, this was the Conference Finals matchup in the Historic League a couple of years ago:

Mourning / Bogut / B. Miller
K. Malone / Ibaka
Giannis / Tatum / Butler
Ginobili / Reddick / E. Gordon
Conley / Rose / Brandon

M. Gasol / Nene
P. Gasol / R. Wallace / Jackson, Jr.
Durant / Granger / Jefferson
Houston / Richardson / Sprewell
Nash / Stockton / Dragic

In a seven games series, I felt -- and still feel -- that the first team would win.  Again, 2004 Detroit vs. LA.  I thought the second team was a largely soft defensive squad that would get out-muscled and out-hustled.  A great offensive squad would be subject to bully-ball, and ultra-soft defenders like Houston and Nash would be major liabilities.  But, the Durant / Nash team ultimately won (and went on to win the title), because most voters in the Historic Draft tend to vote offense over defense.  I'm just stubborn.

[Kernewek]

Offense over defense is all well and good, but I think if we go by way of aphorism team B has more guys who can put the ball in the bucket when you need a shot (also I'd swap Mike Conley for Rose because that's just a blatantly silly bench/starter pairing).

More Team thoughts:


Denver (Who):
PG: Kevin Johnson (89-90) / Gus Williams (78-79)
SG: Eddie Jones (98-99) / Rolando Blackman (84-85) / Fred Brown (76-77)
SF: Bernard King (83-84) / Bob Dandridge (77-78)
PF: Vin Baker (97-98) / Danny Manning (91-92) / Cliff Robinson (97-98)
C: Alonzo Mourning (99-00) / Jack Sikma (81-82)

Even if we presume Bernard King extends his range (I remain skeptical, but it's possible) this is a team that I see much happier in a grind it out, two-point heavy era as far as the starters go, because I don't know how much of an outside game you're getting from your guards (Kevin Johnson obviously developed a three-point shot later in his career, so I do need to factor that in, but he didn't shoot nearly any during the 89-90 season).

And then you have the makings of a razor-fast squad on your bench. Intriguing. I won't pretend to know much about Dandrige, or Sikma from an "I was there watching" perspective, but Sikma's a gimmie for the modern era and I can buy the argument for Dandrige as well. Zo going unmentioned thus far because he's obviously your centerpiece, and he's a tremendous center when it comes to playing at pace.



Toronto (theswitch):
PG: Penny Hardaway (95-96) / Fat Lever (87-88) / Terrell Brandon (95-96)
SG: Paul Westphal (78-79) / Paul Pressey (85-86)
SF: Marques Johnson (78-79) / Danny Granger (08-09)
PF: Jermaine O'Neal (03-04) / Bobby Jones (76-77) / Kiki VandeWeghe (82-83)
C: Marc Gasol (12-13) / Serge Ibaka (13-14)

There are things here I really like - what I'm not so sure of is who Penny (the best player on your team hands down) is going to play with. Maybe it's my memory here and quite possibly I'm wrong, but part of what made Penny and Shaq so good was the transition game - Gasol and Jermaine don't feel like a natural fit for that here, especially running with Westphal and Penny.

But! With Granger at the 4 and Ibaka at the 5, this suddenly makes sense to me. I'll confess to an unfamiliarity with Marques Johnson's game, so maybe that's why I'm not 'getting it'.


OKC (Celtic Fan Forever):
PG: Chauncey Billups / Baron Davis
SG: Michael Redd / Dan Majerle / Allan Houston
SF: Peja Stojakovic / Gerald Wallace
PF: Shawn Kemp / Antonio McDyess / Toni Kukoc
C: Dwight Howard / Tyson Chandler

Full disclosure: I love this team. Dwight & Kemp running the floor, Tre-ja and Michael Redd on the wing, Chauncey at the helm with some hustle & character off the bench (Gerald Wallace & Baron Davis, respectively)? Imagine if those post-Carmelo Denver teams actually had, y'know, star power instead of Kennith Faried and Ty Lawson (no disrespect to those guys)? Chills. Beautiful.

But I think the wing defense is going to be an issue, I think pulling either Dwight or Kemp out of the lane is easily abusable, and I think the drop off from your starters to your bench is pretty massive. I can see this team running out to a big lead in the first 7 minutes, then frittering it away - especially if the shots stop falling.

[Donoghus]

I'll get my presentation up today.  I promise. 

[Moranis]

To be clear, I critiqued McGrady for being a loser and Lanier for missing a bunch of games.  Not the team as a whole.  I just think McGrady is hard to build around because he lost everywhere he went, including situations tailor made for him.  And he lost to inferior teams.  That is the rub.  It isn't the KG Wolves losing to Hakeem, Pippen, Duncan/Robinson, Dirk, and Shaq (though the Wolves certainly could have beaten the Blazers and Mavs), the McGrady teams almost never lost to teams led by the true all timers. McGrady was in theory the best player on the floor and he couldn't get it done in the 1st round, let alone a deep playoff run.

[Roy H.]

OKC (Celtic Fan Forever):
PG: Chauncey Billups / Baron Davis
SG: Michael Redd / Dan Majerle / Allan Houston
SF: Peja Stojakovic / Gerald Wallace
PF: Shawn Kemp / Antonio McDyess / Toni Kukoc
C: Dwight Howard / Tyson Chandler

Full disclosure: I love this team. Dwight & Kemp running the floor, Tre-ja and Michael Redd on the wing, Chauncey at the helm with some hustle & character off the bench (Gerald Wallace & Baron Davis, respectively)? Imagine if those post-Carmelo Denver teams actually had, y'know, star power instead of Kennith Faried and Ty Lawson (no disrespect to those guys)? Chills. Beautiful.

But I think the wing defense is going to be an issue, I think pulling either Dwight or Kemp out of the lane is easily abusable, and I think the drop off from your starters to your bench is pretty massive. I can see this team running out to a big lead in the first 7 minutes, then frittering it away - especially if the shots stop falling.

I think CFF put Majerle into the starting lineup over Redd, a decision I really like.  It brings more balance to both the starters and the bench.  While I agree with you that I don't love the Wallace / McDyess / Chandler bench front court as a collective unit, I *do* really like Davis, Redd and Kukoc as primary backups.  Allan Houston, in that role, would also shine, and Gerald Wallace was a legit impact player on both sides of the ball as a SF/PF.

I wouldn't want to see a lot of Peja + Redd playing together, but I think CFF addressed that.

==================================

(also I'd swap Mike Conley for Rose because that's just a blatantly silly bench/starter pairing)

Not a big fan of bringing starting caliber players off of the bench due to fit / role?

In both Conley vs. Rose and Majerle vs. Redd, the more talented player is giving way to a much better defender who does more things to help out the other starters, while the "better" player lifts the bench.