Define 'Big 3', what does it mean to you

[Ogaju]

What is the genesis of the Big 3 concept in NBA. When did it start and what is a legitimate big 3. Do the three players have to be future hall of famers or not? Will just all-star status do? When can a trio be legitimately referred to as the Big 3? Do they all have to be starters or can one be an all-star caliber sixth man?

This leads back to Ray Allen and the Celtics Big 3. Was the relegation of Allen to the bench an end to the Big 3 era of Pierce Garnett and Allen? Did Ray see this as his exclusion from the Big 3?

I am starting to believe that if Ray did not like going to the bench, but what must have hurt him the most was that the other two members of the trio did not fight for him. They did not go into the foxhole and talk Doc out of the change. He may also have not expected to lose his starting job through injury, and like someone just pointed out in another thread he probably felt vindicated that the team pushed Miami and the refs to 7 games with him as a starter and no Bradley. That propbably convinced him that the relegation to the bench was prmature. He probably felt betrayed by PP and KG because after all they were the three amigos, the three musketeers (one for all and all for one). Just my thoughts.

[Celtics Fan]

I agree.

[kp4000]

Sick of the phrase "Big 3". It's annoying and cliché. There's been "Big 3" for years, but when the Celtics Big 3 was formed, teams started copying and following. The difference between Boston, OKC, Los Angeles and San Antino's Big 3 is that they were designed by trades where as Miami, New york and others; players intended to team up.   

[lightspeed5]

all stars dont cut it. 3 first ballot hall of famers (meaning a resume containing multiple all stars, various awards and records, etc) banding together, taking less $$$, taking less shots, all sacrificed to win a title.

so no ny, tyson chandler and melo and amare are not a big 3. the heat are pushing it because bosh isnt certified to be a hall of famer .... he hasnt done anything spectacular or broken records yet.

[ScottHow]

It really differs person to person.

As far as Boston is concerned, the Big 3 era ended before this offseason. Rondo had clearly past Ray in importance.

[BballTim]

  It's worth pointint out that the original big three was called the big three because the were all actually *big*. Only one player each from the Heat or Celts groups fit that criteria.

  They had an alternative nickname, the best front court of all time.

[Ogaju]

who were the original Big 3?

Bird, Chief. and McHale?

[lightspeed5]

Bird parish and McHale were he original right?

[Celtics18]

It may have been a little embarrassing for Ray to still be thought of as a member of Boston's new "Big Three," but not actually being one of the best three players on the team. 

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

It really differs person to person.

As far as Boston is concerned, the Big 3 era ended before this offseason. Rondo had clearly past Ray in importance.

yup and ray knew it.

[mgent]

Large.

BballTim has it right.  I personally never thought the Big 3 was an appropriate nickname for the 07 squad.



Durant, Dirk, and Gasol would be an example.  I guess the closest in today's league would be the Knicks or the Pacers.

[Who]

For me, it's just about how the core of a team is configured.

One star - some teams like LeBron's Cavs or Hakeem's Rockets (pre-Drexler) built title contenders around only one legitimate star. A one-man show. MVP candidate.

Two stars - Kobe and Shaq, a dynamic duo. Usually a pair of MVP or at least top ten talents together (to be a title contender).

Three stars - the 2008 Celtics, a Big Three. Three perennial All-Stars where at least 1-2 are All-NBA guys (to be a title contender).

Four stars - Usually one high level star (All-NBA or MVP guy) on a max contract with three near to borderline All-Stars usually on $10-12 million apiece (to be a title contender). The current Bulls team is a lot like this with Derrick Rose and Deng, Boozer, Noah (well, planned to be that, Boozer has fallen off).

More balanced -- say 2004 Pistons. That type of squad. They had four/five high caliber starers and probably the best bench in the league. Billups and Big Ben were top five players at their respective positions. Sheed and Rip were top ten arguably top five guys at their positions. Tayshaun Prince was an above average starter. Lots of top tier talent needed (to be a title contender). No MVP guys or guys who are top ten players in the league.

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

So, to repeat, for me it's solely about how a team's core is configured.

Just a common and easy short-hand way to refer to a team that is built around three stars.

[Who]

It may have been a little embarrassing for Ray to still be thought of as a member of Boston's new "Big Three," but not actually being one of the best three players on the team. 

It's a respect / recognition for past services situation.

Same as Reggie Miller's importance to the Pacers in his finals years despite becoming a role player. Still was considered a very important cog in the machine. Heck, they even refused to bring Reggie off the bench despite the team probably being better off with him there.

[Who]

who were the original Big 3?

Bird, Chief. and McHale?

Pretty sure Baylor, West and Wilt were called a big three.

[SHAQATTACK]

KG Pierce and Rondo.


HOLLINS< WILLIAMS and STEAMER 


Bring Back SHEED!!