2011 CB Historical Draft - Draft Thread

[mgent]

Best Run N Gun Team: Toss up between Denver and Indiana, with Indiana probably slightly ahead. Oscar with Clyde and Dr J is potent but a part of great Run N Guns is a front court that can rebound and outlet. Parish is middle of the road as a rebounder in this game and neither he nor most of the very talented PFs on Denver were known for their passing ability. Nash, Wade, Barkley and Marion on the break being fed the ball from Russell is just scary.

You really feel that Russell's outlet passing is so outrageous that it makes up for the play at the other basket?  Sure, he was great, but it's not like any of my guys were horrible passers incapable of making an outlet pass to start the break.  I think you're overrating it a tad here.

I don't think I am. Russell was famous for not only blocking shots but being able to block them in the direction of his team mates so they could start a fast break. He constantly criticizes modern players who would rather knock the ball into the third row and flex and pose rather than blocking the ball in the direction of a team mate top start a fast break.

60's Celtics basketball was predicated upon the same philosophy which was getting the rebound, outletting it to a breaking Cousy or Jones and having people run the lanes and finish. The most important part of that philosophy was the outlet pass where Heinsohn and Russell were magnificent at.

I don't think I can stress enough that in a true fast break offense the importance of an great rebounder who could outlet the ball. Russell was amazing at it. Parish was okay at best and therein lies the difference in your team being just that much less effective at being, IMHO, the best fast break team, Chicago excluded, of course.

Alonzo Mourning (backup C) made a point of keeping the ball in play and trying to direct the swatted shot to a teammate when he blocked shots too.

Alonzo wasn't all that good as an outlet passer though. Not bad but not above average either. Ordinary.

Well my only point was that ordinary is all you need.  As long as the ball goes straight to the PG, the guys running the break and finishing at the basket are way bigger factor.  If I was relying on bad rebounders or guys that can't accurately throw the ball 20 feet that'd be one thing.

[nickagneta]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion. 

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship. 


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

[nickagneta]

Best Run N Gun Team: Toss up between Denver and Indiana, with Indiana probably slightly ahead. Oscar with Clyde and Dr J is potent but a part of great Run N Guns is a front court that can rebound and outlet. Parish is middle of the road as a rebounder in this game and neither he nor most of the very talented PFs on Denver were known for their passing ability. Nash, Wade, Barkley and Marion on the break being fed the ball from Russell is just scary.

You really feel that Russell's outlet passing is so outrageous that it makes up for the play at the other basket?  Sure, he was great, but it's not like any of my guys were horrible passers incapable of making an outlet pass to start the break.  I think you're overrating it a tad here.

I don't think I am. Russell was famous for not only blocking shots but being able to block them in the direction of his team mates so they could start a fast break. He constantly criticizes modern players who would rather knock the ball into the third row and flex and pose rather than blocking the ball in the direction of a team mate top start a fast break.

60's Celtics basketball was predicated upon the same philosophy which was getting the rebound, outletting it to a breaking Cousy or Jones and having people run the lanes and finish. The most important part of that philosophy was the outlet pass where Heinsohn and Russell were magnificent at.

I don't think I can stress enough that in a true fast break offense the importance of an great rebounder who could outlet the ball. Russell was amazing at it. Parish was okay at best and therein lies the difference in your team being just that much less effective at being, IMHO, the best fast break team, Chicago excluded, of course.

Alonzo Mourning (backup C) made a point of keeping the ball in play and trying to direct the swatted shot to a teammate when he blocked shots too.

Alonzo wasn't all that good as an outlet passer though. Not bad but not above average either. Ordinary.

Well my only point was that ordinary is all you need.  As long as the ball goes straight to the PG, the guys running the break and finishing at the basket are way bigger factor.  If I was relying on bad rebounders or guys that can't accurately throw the ball 20 feet that'd be one thing.

That's not true because an ordinary or bad outlet passer will get the ball to the PG in less time and close to their own basket giving the defense that extra half second to 2 seconds to possibly get back in transition and stop the fast break. Oscar, Clyde and Dr. J can be as athletic and unreal open court players but are they really going to do something stupid like force 3 on 4 fast breaks if the outlet pass is coming late or to far down court allowing the defense to react and get back?

Therein lies the difference.

[Fafnir]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion.  

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship.  


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

Are you limiting this to players who won in their "prime" years?

I think more than one team is a championship contender every year, even though only one team wins in a given year. If you're a contender with a good shot at the title you have championship talent. For example the Mavs and Heat both clearly have championship talent.

I don't think something was missing from Malone or Stockton, I think they just lost. Nothing was missing from the 07-08 Lakers, they just got beat by a better C's team. An inferior version of that same Lakers team later beat an inferior version of the C's team in the 09-10 Finals.

[nickagneta]

mgent you have a great fast break team. I just feel Russell with Nash pushes Indiana that little bit ahead of you regarding the quality of the fast break team that they are. That's all.

[nickagneta]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion. 

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship. 


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

Are you limiting this to players who won in their "prime" years?

I think more than one team is a championship contender every year, even though only one team wins in a given year. If you're a contender with a good shot at the title you have championship talent.

I don't think something was missing from Malone or Stockton, I think they just lost. Nothing was missing from the 07-08 Lakers, they just got beat by a better C's team. An inferior version of that same Lakers team later beat an inferior version of the C's team in the 09-10 Finals.

Also a good argument. Not gonna get caught up in it. I was just asking how people viewed it. I view it different than others.

[mgent]

Okay everybody, I take back the phrase "championship level talent" because it was the wrong choice of words and apparently everyone is just focusing on that rather than the point of my post.

Read as this:

I wasn't asking who currently just won a championship, I was looking for champions.  You obviously can't utilize McAdoo's later playoff experience but that doesn't change the fact that he contributed to a team that was the best in the world.

[mgent]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion. 

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship. 


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

Thank you.  It's an extremely abstract way of thinking, but again, there's a reason why the winners won and the losers lost.

[RebusRankin]

Looking at it Moranis's way, I have two champions in my starting line-up, one who won the finals MVP, the other who would have had it existed.

[nickagneta]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion. 

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship. 


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

Thank you.  It's an extremely abstract way of thinking, but again, there's a reason why the winners won and the losers lost.

Yeah, that's the way I look at it too. Like the Milwaukee Bucks of the 80's. They had some unreal talent. Marques Johnson, Sidney Moncrief, Terry Cummings, Ricky Pierce Paul Pressy and so on. Great talent. Not championship level talent. They couldn't go that extra bit and win it all.

[Fafnir]

Thank you.  It's an extremely abstract way of thinking, but again, there's a reason why the winners won and the losers lost.

Which more often than our brains like to believe comes down to random noise.

Does Eddie House hit two big jumpers? Does a ref miss an obvious foul call, does a ball bounce to one player or another, etc...

People like to pretend that there is always a logical reason for it, but much of the time its just a make or miss league. You hit the shot or you don't, nothing to do with you other than a 45% shot going in or rimming out.

[Moranis]

Do players like Gary Payton or Sam Cassell or Steve Smith who jumped on the end of a bench at the end of their careers to win a championship while playing sparingly or quite awful, really make them championship level players their entire careers?

To me a championship caliber player is an player that during their prime was an integral part of winning a championship. The greats come to mind, of course, but a player like Sean Elliott, Robert Horry, John Salley, Danny Ainge, or Kurt Rambis, in my mind, would seem to fit the designation as a championship level player before a guy who got old and decided to jump on the end of a bench to get his ring because in his prime he couldn't do it.

Just one man's opinion. 

Karl Malone is a championship level player and he never won a championship.  So is Charles Barkley.  So is Patrick Ewing.  So are the modern players that have yet to win like Dirk, Kidd, James, etc.  Winning a championship is about having a team capable of winning a championship, some guys have it, some guys don't.

I mean would you rather have Robert Horry or Karl Malone?  Which would you consider a championship level player?  Winning a championship doesn't make you a championship level player or give you championship level talent, it just makes you a part of a team that won a championship. 


For these purposes I don't consider anyone a champion unless his team won the championship in the year selected.  Of course that has no bearing at all on how good I think the player is.

Yeah, I get that point to but if they were championship level talent, wouldn't they have won a championship in their prime?

BTW, this has nothing to do with this draft this is just a general observation. Sometime players, the elite players, just aren't good enough to win a championship. Barkley and Malone and Stockton are great examples. Truly Hall of Fame level talents but perhaps missing that extra something(mentally or character wise) that separates champions from great players. Allen Iverson had unreal talent...not even close to a championship level player in my book.

If KG was never traded to the Celtics, would you really be saying he wasn't a championship level player.  I mean people were saying he was a top five PF ever when he was still in Minnesota.  To say he wasn't a championship level talent is really quite silly.

Teams win championships not players even all time great players can't do it alone.  Jordan didn't even win a playoff series until he had Pippen.  In fact, Jordan was a stellar 1-9 in his first three playoffs (all without Pippen).  Next year with Pippen (as a rookie mind you) 4-6 in the post season beating the Cavs and losing to the Pistons.  Pippen much better in his second year and they make the conference finals again losing to the eventual champion Pistons, but going 9-8 in the playoffs.  Third year, they really push the eventual champion Pistons losing in 7 in the conference finals and improve the playoff record to 10-6.  After that is the first three-peat.

Now perhaps Jordan would have won a title eventually and he certainly would have won a playoff series at some point, but it would be a hard sell to say he would have done it as quickly without Scottie Pippen.  Teams win, not players.

[mgent]

Best Run N Gun Team: Toss up between Denver and Indiana, with Indiana probably slightly ahead. Oscar with Clyde and Dr J is potent but a part of great Run N Guns is a front court that can rebound and outlet. Parish is middle of the road as a rebounder in this game and neither he nor most of the very talented PFs on Denver were known for their passing ability. Nash, Wade, Barkley and Marion on the break being fed the ball from Russell is just scary.

You really feel that Russell's outlet passing is so outrageous that it makes up for the play at the other basket?  Sure, he was great, but it's not like any of my guys were horrible passers incapable of making an outlet pass to start the break.  I think you're overrating it a tad here.

I don't think I am. Russell was famous for not only blocking shots but being able to block them in the direction of his team mates so they could start a fast break. He constantly criticizes modern players who would rather knock the ball into the third row and flex and pose rather than blocking the ball in the direction of a team mate top start a fast break.

60's Celtics basketball was predicated upon the same philosophy which was getting the rebound, outletting it to a breaking Cousy or Jones and having people run the lanes and finish. The most important part of that philosophy was the outlet pass where Heinsohn and Russell were magnificent at.

I don't think I can stress enough that in a true fast break offense the importance of an great rebounder who could outlet the ball. Russell was amazing at it. Parish was okay at best and therein lies the difference in your team being just that much less effective at being, IMHO, the best fast break team, Chicago excluded, of course.

Alonzo Mourning (backup C) made a point of keeping the ball in play and trying to direct the swatted shot to a teammate when he blocked shots too.

Alonzo wasn't all that good as an outlet passer though. Not bad but not above average either. Ordinary.

Well my only point was that ordinary is all you need.  As long as the ball goes straight to the PG, the guys running the break and finishing at the basket are way bigger factor.  If I was relying on bad rebounders or guys that can't accurately throw the ball 20 feet that'd be one thing.

That's not true because an ordinary or bad outlet passer will get the ball to the PG in less time and close to their own basket giving the defense that extra half second to 2 seconds to possibly get back in transition and stop the fast break. Oscar, Clyde and Dr. J can be as athletic and unreal open court players but are they really going to do something stupid like force 3 on 4 fast breaks if the outlet pass is coming late or to far down court allowing the defense to react and get back?

Therein lies the difference.

Well that's what I would consider bad, not ordinary.

Russell might have been the best all-time outlet passer, but that doesn't mean whoever you're comparing him to automatically screws up the entire fast-break.  You've got to be a bad passer to throw a pass that you practice every day, 3 feet off the target or hesitate an extra 2 seconds.

As far as I'm concerned no one on my team consistently threw outlet passes in a manner that allowed the defenses to set up.

[Who]

Charles Barkley and Bill Russell are going to beat Elvin Hayes and Robert Parish down the court on a regular basis. They are too quick and too athletic in a running game for Hayes and Parish to handle.

Having five guys out to races like that is a key advantage for Indy as a Run and Gun ball club.

[mgent]

I think my 5 guys would outrun the other teams in the league with just as much regularity