Is it time to kill the small ball myth?

[LarBrd33]

Every champion in the history of the league has had at least one "elite-level" big man.  They generally have an elite scorer as well (or a super-elite big who fills both roles), but let's talk about big men.  My qualifications might be a little lax, though.  For instance, Dallas had 7 foot Dirk, but also 7'1 Tyson Chandler who was a defensive player of the year candidate.  I'm counting Chandler.  And I'm rejecting the idea that the Pippen/Jordan Bulls didn't have elite bigs... the first 3 titles were with Horace Grant, an 6-10 all-star PF.  And their last 3 titles were with 6'9 Dennis Rodman, player who dominated defensively and on the glass.


No surprise the Celtics went from the dregs of the league to a team that contended for 3.5 years with the arrival of Kevin Garnett, a dominant defensive 7'1 big man.


But recently there's this idea that the league has evolved and you no longer need elite bigs to compete.  As if you can stick a 37 year old PF out there with a 3rd string PF or a SF playing out of position and contend for a title.  Part of the blame for this is Miami's success.   It ignores the fact that LeBron James (who has been officially listed as 6'8/240 since being drafted) is reportedly actually 6'9 and 260-270 pounds.  So they have a transcendent basketball player who is roughly the same size of Karl Malone.  Had LeBron played in Russell's era (Russ = 6'9 and 215), he probably would have played center.  Yeah... LeBron is bigger than Dave Cowens (6'9 230) ...   But even if you disagree with the notion that King James is a big man you have to admit that they have an all-star level big in 6'11, 230 pound Chris Bosh.

Look at the teams currently in the running for a title:

Golden State:  They are probably about to be eliminated.  Steph Curry's incredible shooting is the main story... but it shouldn't be a surprise that their sudden threat for a deep playoff run coincided with the re-emergence of former elite 7 foot 260 pound big man, Andrew Bogut (all-nba in 2010) ... In the Denver series he averaged 8 points, 10 rebounds, 2.3 blocks on 63% shooting in 27 MPG.  He's averaging 12 rebounds in the series vs San Antonio... unlikely to win this series, though.

San Antonio - 7 foot 250 pound Tim Duncan is still a dominant 20 and 10 player who drives this team.  They are starting him next to 6'11 240 pound Tiago Splitter.  Classic size.

Indiana - 7'2 280 pound Roy Hibbert next to 6'9 250 pound David West.  Both have made all-star teams.  Classic size. 

Memphis -  The team now considered to be the biggest threat to knock off the Heat is built around the skills of all-star defensive player of the year, 7-1 265 pound Marc Gasol.  He's a player some are arguing is now the best center in the league (hence all the "member when i said I'd take Marc Gasol over Howard" comments on this forum).  Along side Gasol is 6'9 260 pound all-star Zach Randolph.  CLASSIC size.


Now sure... if you can land a transcendent player like LeBron (arguably a big man) or Durant (6'10, but nobody will argue he's a big)... maybe you take your chances with "small ball.  I mean sure, this ignores the fact that the Thunder were not considered real contenders for a title until they traded for a traditionally sized center and did away with "small ball".   

But it does indeed seem like the giants still rule this league.  The last team to win a title with a PG as their best player was the 80s Pistons and they still had allstar bigs like Laimbeer and Rodman holding down the fort.

It's for the reason that I see this Celtics team as a sure-fire lotto participant if KG retires.   It's also the reason why I'd take a chance on signing Greg Oden even though there's a 1% chance he ever gets healthy enough to contribute.  Yeah you might make the playoffs without elite size, but you probably aren't going very far.

[wdleehi]

Of course it is a myth. 


Just like the Myth that Doc will not play bigs in favor of small ball.  Doc has proven he will play big talent, not just big bodies that happen to be on the bench.

[LarBrd33]

Of course it is a myth. 


Just like the Myth that Doc will not play bigs in favor of small ball.  Doc has proven he will play big talent, not just big bodies that happen to be on the bench.

Yeah I might be slightly lax on my qualifications for "quality size"... but everyone I named is either a PF or C who is at least 6'9 and has either made an all-star team, all-NBA team or won defensive player of the year. 

KG was once a top 5 player in this league.  A dominant defensive player in 2008 and has remained effective since... but it's tough to rely on him to do everything.  Once we got rid of Perk (a big defensive role player) and elderly Shaq (still a capable big role player his final year), this team has been completely devoid of quality size next to minute-reduced Garnett.  Brandon Bass was supposed to be a 3rd string big.  Jeff Green is talented, but he's a classic SF.  Doc would play size if we had any.  Our size being left on the bench barely qualifies as NBA talent. 

We went hard after David West last year and missed out on him.  We've been desperate to find another quality big since. 

[Snakehead]

Who doesn't think you need one quality player at least 6' 9" to win a title?  Not sure who this is possibly in response to.

The Heat's best lineup has become the small ball lineup to point to for success and it has 1 (maybe 2 since LeBron is close).

[KGs Knee]

You'll never get an argument otherwise out of me.  Big-boy basketball, as I call it, is still the dominant style.  Likely always will be.

My contention has always been that we should be trying to add a legit big to complement Rondo, not in place of.

[SHAQATTACK]

Its way past time....... LBJ is  ONE and ONLY .....not beating him with small players , he is a HUGE guy and fast.

Need lots of BIGS ....SHAQ, DUNCAN, Hibbert , ect to keep LBJ and Wade out of the paint.


I hate small ball.....that belongs to the HEAT with LBJ playing five positions.  HE AN'T HUMAN.

[LooseCannon]

It's hard to win a title without multiple elite players.  Since there are only five positions and two of them are bigs, it is hard to have multiple elite players and not have one of them be a big.  If you have two random elite players whose positions don't overlap, assuming there are the same number of elite players at each position, you have a 70% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.  If you have three elite players, you have a 90% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.

[LarBrd33]

It's hard to win a title without multiple elite players.  Since there are only five positions and two of them are bigs, it is hard to have multiple elite players and not have one of them be a big.  If you have two random elite players whose positions don't overlap, assuming there are the same number of elite players at each position, you have a 70% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.  If you have three elite players, you have a 90% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.

I think the point is... those that think you can compete with a team of PG - Rondo, PG - Avery Bradley, SF - Jeff Green, PF - Brandon Bass and PF - Sully  ... are high.  An undersized lineup consisting of two starters and 3 backups isn't going to make the playoffs.

[pearljammer10]

Ive been hoping we kill the small idea for a long time now... Gotta get an inside presence on both side of the floor. KG is a defensive master but he allergic to posting up and layups. Putting a big banger alongside of him would help immensely.

Cough Darko Cough... Oh what could have been.

[LooseCannon]

It's hard to win a title without multiple elite players.  Since there are only five positions and two of them are bigs, it is hard to have multiple elite players and not have one of them be a big.  If you have two random elite players whose positions don't overlap, assuming there are the same number of elite players at each position, you have a 70% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.  If you have three elite players, you have a 90% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.

I think the point is... those that think you can compete with a team of PG - Rondo, PG - Avery Bradley, SF - Jeff Green, PF - Brandon Bass and PF - Sully  ... are high.  An undersized lineup consisting of two starters and 3 backups isn't going to make the playoffs.

Would you feel comfortable spinning the team's wheels for a season if you thought there was a decent chance that a package of expiring contracts, Sullinger, whoever the team drafts in 2013, and the 2014 first round pick could be used to acquire a potential elite big to go with Rondo, Bradley, and Green?  (I'm not asking whether you think there is a decent chance that will happen, just if you would support that strategy if you thought there was a reasonable chance.)

[LarBrd33]

It's hard to win a title without multiple elite players.  Since there are only five positions and two of them are bigs, it is hard to have multiple elite players and not have one of them be a big.  If you have two random elite players whose positions don't overlap, assuming there are the same number of elite players at each position, you have a 70% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.  If you have three elite players, you have a 90% chance of having an elite big man on your roster.

I think the point is... those that think you can compete with a team of PG - Rondo, PG - Avery Bradley, SF - Jeff Green, PF - Brandon Bass and PF - Sully  ... are high.  An undersized lineup consisting of two starters and 3 backups isn't going to make the playoffs.

Would you feel comfortable spinning the team's wheels for a season if you thought there was a decent chance that a package of expiring contracts, Sullinger, whoever the team drafts in 2013, and the 2014 first round pick could be used to acquire a potential elite big to go with Rondo, Bradley, and Green?  (I'm not asking whether you think there is a decent chance that will happen, just if you would support that strategy if you thought there was a reasonable chance.)

Rondo is a borderline allstar hearing forward.

Green is a good scorer, but will never be an allstar

Avery Bradley is a one-dimensional backup pg.

Even if I thought it was possible to package some lesser assets for an elite-level big, we would still need an elite scorer to contend... And I dont see Jeff green as being on that level.  I do think full-blown tanking next season would be smart, though.  You either get an major prospect to build around or a major asset to use in trades.  As-is we probably don't have enough assets to land anyone substantial.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

I agree with the OP.

Small ball works for the Heat for one reason only: they have the best player on the planet. Take him away and they wouldn't get far running with a small lineup.

I somewhat agree with those who say Doc went small so often because he didn't have any other quality bigs. Sure, KG was the only All-Star-caliber big on the team this season (Sully was pretty effective, too, when he was in there), but I also feel like it can't hurt to try giving some of the "inferior" players some extended run, just to see what they can do. Shav looked pretty good; sure, it was in limited minutes and against some lesser teams, but his good performance in those situations should've earned him some opportunities in bigger situations. A 6-10 guy who shows a penchant for rebounding? Why NOT give him an extended look?

[SHAQATTACK]

Sully and Green are a good start for smaller positions.  KG is a great defensive specialist. Rondo and AB are decent.   We are starved ....lying in the dessert dead with no NOAH, Varaejeo,  ASIk , types to have a paint presence 48 minutes , not 25 minutes.  25 Minutes is NOT enough BIG to win with.  BASS and SULLY are N O T centers . 

We NEED a couple HIGH ENERGY CENTERS  or at least ones YOUNG ENOUGH to play decent minutes without dying.   Like Marc Gasol, Cousins, Noah Asik, Splitter....guys that are NOT broken down or too old to stay in there and PLAY when the game is on the line.

I still think DMC with tutoring from KG, if we could possibly add him to this team would be a Athletic and BIG to front and contain Wade and James.

[bdm860]

I think your definition of “elite” is way too generous just for the purpose of fitting your thesis.

If Horace Grant and Tyson Chandler are “elite”, I want to know what your definition of “elite” is, because right now it really comes off as whoever you want it to be. 

I have a feeling if Golden State was winning, you’d suddenly consider David Lee (2x All-Star) or Bogut “elite.”

Dennis Rodman grows to 6’9” to fit your definition of big, while basketball-reference and nba.com list him as 6’7”, and he’ll tell you he’s 6’6”. 

And you can’t take a snap shot of the 4 teams that look like they’ll be in the Conference Finals and say that proves a point.  Because then that point dies when you have teams like OKC (oh wait, is Ibaka “elite” level now?)  who made the Finals last year, and was a favorite to contend this year, before Westbrook went down.

And yet why do all these other teams with “elite” level bigs still lose, often to teams with lesser “elite” bigs?

Or teams with “elite” level bigs perform much worse when their “elite" level guard is injured (LAL, Chicago).

Or we could point to the failures of teams that drafted for size instead of best player available (Bowie, Olowokandi, O’Bryant, Swift: Robert or Stromile, Thabeet, etc.).  You think Philly would have made a Finals had they drafted Camby (who I guess is “elite” since Chandler is) over Iverson in ‘96?  What if Chicago went with Beasley over Rose in search of that elite big?  You think they'd be better off?

Has Atlanta ever looked good with their two "elite" level bigs?

I think it’s more of a myth that there’s some magic formula for building a championship team.

Although that being said, I would think it’s common sense, that the game of basketball, where the goal is to get the ball into a 10 foot hoop while keeping your opponents from doing the same, that a team with strength and size would likely have the best chance of doing that.  And I don’t particularly like next year’s Celtics chances without Garnett either, or with him for that matter.

I just don’t think your point, and the evidence you provided really proves anything.

Yes a team without a lot of good players usually won't win, and as LooseCannon pointed out there's only 5 positions, so good teams will usually have elite players at every position, especially when you basically narrow it down to 3 positions of big, guard, and wing that get to be filled by 5 players.

[ManUp]

TP, LarBrd33.

I've been saying this for ever. The idea that big men are becoming obsolete is total garbage. The rules have been bent to give smaller quicker guys the edge in almost all facets of the game. This makes for a more exciting and prettier game for casual fans. However, One thing you can't change is that if you control the paint you control the game. Quality big men do that by limiting high percentage shots at the rim on defense, creating them on offense, preventing second chance opportunities on defense, and vice-versa on offense. It's the reason Chicago, Memphis, and Indiana have been so successful despite a lack of star power.