2013 CB Historical Draft: Team Rosters

[Moranis]

Washington getting ignored...

            
Floyd               Davis               Wilkes               McAdoo               Gilmore

            
Buckner               Smith               Pressey               Johnson               Ruland

Love the starting front court, but I think your guards and wings are a bit more specialized than most. 

[wdleehi]

Nothing about the Hawks?

Starting line up

pg  All NBA 1st team / 1 time champ
sg  All NBA 2nd team / All defensive team / 1 time champ
sf  All NBA 1st team
pf  Hall of Famer / NBA MVP / All Defensive team / 2 time champ
C  Hall of famer / all NBA team / 3 time champ


Bench

PG  All NBA 2nd team
SG  All NBA 2nd team
PF  All NBA 2nd team

Add two more all d team members to the bench at SF and C.



Still no love from this team.   Boring players?

I think you have one of the most likable teams in the league. Your team is made of a bunch of good guys, hard working guys, tough guys, guys everyone wants on your team. Now add a Larry or Magic or Dr J. or Kareem or someone that can be that #1 guy, especially offensively. I don't know. I just think you are missing that "guy" in a draft with only so many of those type of "guy"s.

Yeah I think that is the problem with the Hawks as well.  You just have to have that guy that you know when the game is on the line can make the plays needed to get your team over the hump.  I just don't see it with the Hawks.

Cowens was the leading scorer on a balanced Celtics offense.  He would not have to be here. 

Johnson (1st team all NBA that year) in 78-79 averaged 25.6 points a game shooting 55%.

Gus Williams (1st team all NBA that year) in 81-82 averaged 23.4 points a game (along with 6.9 assists) and shoot over 50%

Tom Chambers (2nd team all NBA that year) in 89-90 averaged 27.2 points a game shooting 50%

Phil Smith (2nd team all NBA and 2nd team all def that year) averaged 20 points a game in 75-76

Paxson (2nd team all NBA that year) averaged 21.3 points a game in 83-84.



So I have a team with plenty of offensive pop, plenty of defense and great leadership of a guy who was the NBA MVP and lead his team to two titles. 


What my team lacks in hype, it makes up for in the results they had on the floor.

Every team here can say the same thing and roll out the same stats or even better stats. You are missing star power. Teams win in the NBA without star power. But it is the exception, not the rule, and in this endeavor, I don't think it pays off with votes.

You have an excellent team and one, I would root for and cheer on because I like all those players. I just think you are missing that one guy in this draft and it will make a difference. BTW, you aren't the only team with that problem.

I have an NBA MVP who lead his team to two titles. 


I have the star talent without the star hype.

[nickagneta]

Nothing about the Hawks?

Starting line up

pg  All NBA 1st team / 1 time champ
sg  All NBA 2nd team / All defensive team / 1 time champ
sf  All NBA 1st team
pf  Hall of Famer / NBA MVP / All Defensive team / 2 time champ
C  Hall of famer / all NBA team / 3 time champ


Bench

PG  All NBA 2nd team
SG  All NBA 2nd team
PF  All NBA 2nd team

Add two more all d team members to the bench at SF and C.



Still no love from this team.   Boring players?

I think you have one of the most likable teams in the league. Your team is made of a bunch of good guys, hard working guys, tough guys, guys everyone wants on your team. Now add a Larry or Magic or Dr J. or Kareem or someone that can be that #1 guy, especially offensively. I don't know. I just think you are missing that "guy" in a draft with only so many of those type of "guy"s.

Yeah I think that is the problem with the Hawks as well.  You just have to have that guy that you know when the game is on the line can make the plays needed to get your team over the hump.  I just don't see it with the Hawks.

Cowens was the leading scorer on a balanced Celtics offense.  He would not have to be here. 

Johnson (1st team all NBA that year) in 78-79 averaged 25.6 points a game shooting 55%.

Gus Williams (1st team all NBA that year) in 81-82 averaged 23.4 points a game (along with 6.9 assists) and shoot over 50%

Tom Chambers (2nd team all NBA that year) in 89-90 averaged 27.2 points a game shooting 50%

Phil Smith (2nd team all NBA and 2nd team all def that year) averaged 20 points a game in 75-76

Paxson (2nd team all NBA that year) averaged 21.3 points a game in 83-84.



So I have a team with plenty of offensive pop, plenty of defense and great leadership of a guy who was the NBA MVP and lead his team to two titles. 


What my team lacks in hype, it makes up for in the results they had on the floor.

Every team here can say the same thing and roll out the same stats or even better stats. You are missing star power. Teams win in the NBA without star power. But it is the exception, not the rule, and in this endeavor, I don't think it pays off with votes.

You have an excellent team and one, I would root for and cheer on because I like all those players. I just think you are missing that one guy in this draft and it will make a difference. BTW, you aren't the only team with that problem.

I have an NBA MVP who lead his team to two titles. 


I have the star talent without the star hype.

That MVP was the heart of his team, but that was Hondo's team not his

[wdleehi]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look. 

[bdm860]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

Interestingly that MVP couldn't even make 1st Team All-NBA during his MVP year.  (Glad to see we've come so far with the voting the last 40 years  )

I think that's the problem with Cowens, or at least with the perception of him.  Even in his MVP year, he apparently wasn't seen as head and shoulders above everybody else.  Whereas with guys like Larry, Magic, Kareem, when they dominated, there was such a big gap between them and the tier below them.

If you had to pick between the two, you'd really pick '73 Cowens over '73 Kareem?  Personally I'd probably even take '73 Artis Gilmore over Cowens.  That's the problem with Cowens.

[Moranis]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

[wdleehi]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

And he won nothing.


I have a team loaded with guys that 20 plus points in the year I took them (and that is the point of choosing the year) 

Guys that were recognized those years as being among the best players that season.


Guys that were part of championships. 



To throw out what they did just because they do no have the big name makes this a contest of who pick the guys most people know, not who picked the strongest player seasons. 

[Moranis]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

And he won nothing.


I have a team loaded with guys that 20 plus points in the year I took them (and that is the point of choosing the year) 

Guys that were recognized those years as being among the best players that season.


Guys that were part of championships. 



To throw out what they did just because they do no have the big name makes this a contest of who pick the guys most people know, not who picked the strongest player seasons.

But virtually everybody has players like that, so having that go to scorer is a big deal and what separates teams in my opinion.  I mean Karl Malone didn't win a title, but that doesn't mean he isn't one of, if not the, greatest PF in the history of the game.  On teams loaded with great players and champions (which is what these 12 teams are), you need to have that one guy that you know will put it in the hole when the game is on the line.  That is obviously just my opinion, but I don't seem to be alone in that line of thinking. 

[wdleehi]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

And he won nothing.


I have a team loaded with guys that 20 plus points in the year I took them (and that is the point of choosing the year) 

Guys that were recognized those years as being among the best players that season.


Guys that were part of championships. 



To throw out what they did just because they do no have the big name makes this a contest of who pick the guys most people know, not who picked the strongest player seasons.

But virtually everybody has players like that, so having that go to scorer is a big deal and what separates teams in my opinion.  I mean Karl Malone didn't win a title, but that doesn't mean he isn't one of, if not the, greatest PF in the history of the game.  On teams loaded with great players and champions (which is what these 12 teams are), you need to have that one guy that you know will put it in the hole when the game is on the line.  That is obviously just my opinion, but I don't seem to be alone in that line of thinking.

Everyone has loaded teams.


I loaded my team with guys that showed the ability to be part of loaded teams and win titles. 


Can you say that about the flashier scorers that have been mentioned? 



The only weakness I have heard is my team doesn't have Bird/Magic/Kareem. 

[Moranis]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

And he won nothing.


I have a team loaded with guys that 20 plus points in the year I took them (and that is the point of choosing the year) 

Guys that were recognized those years as being among the best players that season.


Guys that were part of championships. 



To throw out what they did just because they do no have the big name makes this a contest of who pick the guys most people know, not who picked the strongest player seasons.

But virtually everybody has players like that, so having that go to scorer is a big deal and what separates teams in my opinion.  I mean Karl Malone didn't win a title, but that doesn't mean he isn't one of, if not the, greatest PF in the history of the game.  On teams loaded with great players and champions (which is what these 12 teams are), you need to have that one guy that you know will put it in the hole when the game is on the line.  That is obviously just my opinion, but I don't seem to be alone in that line of thinking.

Everyone has loaded teams.


I loaded my team with guys that showed the ability to be part of loaded teams and win titles. 


Can you say that about the flashier scorers that have been mentioned? 



The only weakness I have heard is my team doesn't have Bird/Magic/Kareem.

loaded teams and win titles, but not as their teams best player, leading scorer, etc.  You just don't have that guy.  And let's be real you have Cowens, Williams, and Parish that were integral part of title teams (wedman picked up a couple of titles later on but didn't play much during those seasons) and you are playing Cowens out of position.  It isn't like all 10 of your guys were on title teams.  You are definitely over selling that a great deal.

Also, no one said you had to have Bird/Magic/Kareem.  I mean I don't have one of those guys and many people have said they believe I have the best team. 

[wdleehi]

So in summation, unless you grabbed one of the top 4 or 5 guys, you can not have enough star power to win?



No. 



I have an NBA MVP on my team.  He was the best player on two title teams.  I have plenty of "star" power, even if he is a player people over look.

For me it is about go to scorers.  There are players that fit that bill that weren't top 5 guys.  Nique is a great example of that guy.  Alex English, George Gervin, and Adrian Dantley are others.  Guys that year in and year out showed they could consistently put the ball in the hole as well as anyone else. And I know this is a one year capsule in a player's career, but for me a guy like Tom Chambers, even though he had a monster season or two, wasn't a consistent #1 scoring option throughout his career and that will always factor in in how he is viewed.

And he won nothing.


I have a team loaded with guys that 20 plus points in the year I took them (and that is the point of choosing the year) 

Guys that were recognized those years as being among the best players that season.


Guys that were part of championships. 



To throw out what they did just because they do no have the big name makes this a contest of who pick the guys most people know, not who picked the strongest player seasons.

But virtually everybody has players like that, so having that go to scorer is a big deal and what separates teams in my opinion.  I mean Karl Malone didn't win a title, but that doesn't mean he isn't one of, if not the, greatest PF in the history of the game.  On teams loaded with great players and champions (which is what these 12 teams are), you need to have that one guy that you know will put it in the hole when the game is on the line.  That is obviously just my opinion, but I don't seem to be alone in that line of thinking.

Everyone has loaded teams.


I loaded my team with guys that showed the ability to be part of loaded teams and win titles. 


Can you say that about the flashier scorers that have been mentioned? 



The only weakness I have heard is my team doesn't have Bird/Magic/Kareem.

loaded teams and win titles, but not as their teams best player, leading scorer, etc.  You just don't have that guy.  And let's be real you have Cowens, Williams, and Parish that were integral part of title teams (wedman picked up a couple of titles later on but didn't play much during those seasons) and you are playing Cowens out of position.  It isn't like all 10 of your guys were on title teams.  You are definitely over selling that a great deal.

Also, no one said you had to have Bird/Magic/Kareem.  I mean I don't have one of those guys and many people have said they believe I have the best team.

Cowens was the best player on his team.  He was the NBA MVP. 


And both the starting SG and PG were part of title winning teams. 



What my team lacks in name recognition. 

[nickagneta]

New York Knicks
COACH: Tommy Heinsohn
PG: Fat Lever/John Lucas
SG: World B Free/Danny Ainge
SF: Larry Bird/John Drew/Orlando Woolridge
PF: Dan Issel/James Bailey/Mitch Kupchak
C: Darryl Dawkins/James Donaldson

I think this team had an excellent chance to be one of th best offensive team in the league. I would have Ainge starting and Free coming off the bench, however. This is going to have to be a running team for most of the season and I could see line ups when Issel is moved to center, Drew to PF, with Bird, Ainge and Lever or Bird Free and Lucas. The Bird, lever, Issel Ainge grouping is just some dynamic passing and ball movement in the half court as well, so all in all, just a superb offense.

But the Knicks, as of right now, are lacking up front. Issel was a running, unathletic center with a mid range game in the 70's, he translates to the PF position but even here, he's not a great fit. I don't like Dawkins with this group either. I lot of smart players and then a complete moron. Bird will either kill him or go binge drinking with him ala Rick Robey, making Dawkins trade bait very quickly once things settle out.

I might entertain starting Donaldson at center as he was a very good 4th-5th offensive option in his time and a very good defender with size(7'2"). I just think limiting Dawkins would help this team. Also, if Donaldson starts, I like Kupchak as the first big off the bench. He's smart, versatile enough to play well with either Issel or Donaldson and  knows how to play winning basketball.

This also is not a great defensive team.

Definitely in the running for Best Offensive Team, but I am not sure Bird has enough defense around him to make this a team in the running for Best Overall Team.

BTW, Tommy Heinsohn was a brilliant pick as coach of this particular team. New York gets the rare bump in my book for picking an excellent choice at coach to match the personnel.

[nickagneta]

Los Angeles Lakers
COACH: Don Nelson
PG: Don Buse/Larry Drew/Rory Sparrow
SG: Sidney Moncrief/Michael Cooper
SF: M.L. Carr/Kelly Tripuka/Mike Mitchell
PF: Dan Roundfield/Cliff Robinson
C: Kareem Abdul Jabbar/Billy Paultz

Kind of just did my opinion on this team in the draft thread but I think it has real potential to win the Best Overall Team and Best Defensive Team. I didn't think that before but I believe Yoki did a stellar job drafting in the late rounds that made up for some questionable picks early on.

In many ways, Yoki has the best Offensive and Defensive player in this draft but probably not the best overall player, if you can believe that. Buse is under rated but an excellent floor general and passer and he and Moncreif, also an excellent passer, should be able to work one of the best inside out games in the league. I like Mitchell and Robinson as role playing starters for this club as they were both very good two way players that knew their roles on their teams well.

Cooper off the bench as a defensive stopper at three positions is the type of bench weapon few teams have. Larry Bird called him the best defensive player he ever played against. Add Billy Paultz and Carr coming off the bench and you can still maintain defensive efficiency while scoring with Roundfield and Tripuka and Drew.

Just a very balanced team with a lot of good fits for roles that seem built into this team.

I would still trade Tripuka as he just does not fit well here but if you need offense, he can give you that, though little else.

Edit: According to your submitted roster, it looks like you are going to start Carr and Roundfield. I think that a mistake but we will see how it effects you or if you are going to do something with your rotation to mitigate this.

[Moranis]

Removed.

[nickagneta]

Seattle Supersonics
COACH: Jerry Sloan
PG: Maurice Cheeks/Lionel Hollins
SG: Eddie Johnson/Ricky Pierce/Trent Tucker
SF: Adrian Dantley/Greg Ballard
PF: Buck Williams/Caldwell Jones
C: Bill Walton/James Edwards/Danny Schayes

There is so much to like about this team but it also has Adrian Dantley. Dantley could ball and hang stats with the best of them. But there's a reason Dantley was traded for Aguirre and why Detroit went on to win two titles after that trade. Dantley is allergic to playing defense and playing well with others in a full "team" format.

Everything else about this team I like. I love Walton and think him one of the best players to ever live when he was in his prime. he and Buck Williams are amongst the best fitting front court duos in this draft. But Walton will be missing 1 out of every 5 games which puts a lot of pressure on Edwards and Jones to give this team offense from the front court or else this team gets very easy to defend.

This is not one of the best defensive teams or one of the best offensive teams. But it is a very good team and probably can make an argument for being one of the better overall teams. But man, Dantley just kills the makeup of this team. I would trade him.

Edit: The Schayes addition does nothing for me but I like the Ballard addition. Really hope you use him more than Dantley, unfortunately, you have Dantley's offense playing a huge role in this team.