Gil Scott-Heroin
Veteran
Still can't believe there's only one poster (besides myself) that has DRob in their team. He's the best option you can have at the 5. Curry, Durant, and DRob pretty much pick themselves.
Last edited:
Assemble a starting 5 that can defeat this lineup.
- Thread starter Elim Garak
- Start date
Still can't believe there's only one poster (besides myself) that has DRob in their team. He's the best option you can have at the 5. Curry, Durant, and DRob pretty much pick themselves.
Lmao at the thought of a triangle with Kobe MJ and Shaq. That shyt would be all fukked up....what do Magic and Bron do in this scenario?
How would this shyt even work? Team chemistry is almost more important than individual talent.
To be honest I think the current Warriors and replace Dray for like KG or Duncan is enough to beat that team.
How would this shyt even work? Team chemistry is almost more important than individual talent.
To be honest I think the current Warriors and replace Dray for like KG or Duncan is enough to beat that team.
Gil Scott-Heroin
Veteran
I think that's what A LOT of folks in here are failing to take into account, they're just simply looking at the names and their brains automatically hit a tripwire. There's a lot of redundancy on that team, and while it's not necessarily a bad thing, it's easily countered if you use the right strategy.
Columbo
Lieutenant
Ray wasnt known for his defense but he could defend good when he needed to, far from a liability. Im with you on that brehWhich is why I don't understand how @Shadow King and @Rhakim are acting like he was a "defensive weakness".
There's no point contesting this, I've already shown you evidence of Ray's defense on Kobe (both players near their peaks), where he's holding his own. To call him a "defensive weakness" is drenching your argument in revisionism and doubling-down on being blatantly wrong. The fact you aren't willing to concede this point tells me, once again, that you've already subconsciously conceded the argument but don't want to admit so, which is why you're arguing nonsense that has already proven to be untrue.
He was always one of the most conditioned, disciplined players due to his military background, and he knew how to navigate his way around screens/read player tendencies; he was never a defensive game-changer, but he ranged from average-to-good during his prime, before he started to deteriorate and the bone spurs slowed him down.
You called him a "defensive weakness" - that is WRONG (especially in this context given that I've provided proof of him holding his own, defensively, against Kobe), no amount of juelz'ng is gonna take away from that fact.
If I thought the straw man bullshyt was bad in your previous post, you've surely outdone yourself here.
The fact you think I'm "assuming" this only reinforces my belief that you really have conceded this debate. In no part of any of my posts have I stated or even so much as insinuated that those three would be better defensively than Jordan-Kobe-LeBron offensively - how in the hell could you possibly take that out of what I said?
My argument is simply - Allen, Reggie (or Klay), and Durant would limit them from shooting above 60 FG% as a collective from the field (a mark they'd need to reach to equalize the production from 40% 3-pt shooting); I'm not saying they couldn't shoot above 40 FG%, and I'm not saying they couldn't shoot above 50 FG% (although they probably wouldn't given the scheme).
That is NOT saying they'd be better defensively than their respective counterparts would be offensively. In production terms, being better defensively would be holding them to under 40 FG% - yet I'm not arguing that.
I already told you in my previous post, you're not supposed to take those percentages, literally, they're just a mark of what they managed to shoot. There is no matchup #s dating back that far, the only way to get the 1v1 #s is to go through the tape of all the games. The point in referencing their general 3pt %s from those series', is to let you know they managed to shoot high volume on high percentages as the main option, against Kobe's and MJ's respective teams - Kobe nor MJ were able to stop them from achieving those percentages, regardless if they were guarding them every possession or not. Both of them were predominately the main outside scoring threats, now if you were to put them on a team and they weren't the main outside scoring threats, how do you think they'd go with more open looks?
Allen was a 40% 3-pt shooter in the postseason (171 games)
Reggie was a 40% 3-pt shooter in the postseason (144 games)
You're telling me it's not reasonable to think they couldn't replicate those #s (even do better), playing at their peaks, with more floor-spacing, and open looks (due to playing next to each other, Curry and Durant), than at any point of their respective careers?
This is where common sense comes into play.
Kobe, MJ, LeBron, Magic are NOT chasing around all of Curry, Ray, Reggie (or Klay), and Durant around the halfcourt - that's the point. The amount and variety of screens that they'd set for themselves and the open looks they'd get would make it nearly impossible to defend. All those players regularly found openings and open looks to get their shots off, as individuals (with heavy defensive attention), imagine the open looks they'd get if they were all on the court at the same time, with less defensive attention? You have arguably the greatest 3-4 off-ball players and shooters all on the court at once, moving at the same time, setting and running around screens in a constant state of chaos, how could you possibly think any team could stop them from getting open looks (let alone a team with two perimeter defensive weaknesses in Magic and Shaq)?
At least ONE of them is going to be open every single possession.
Oh look, another straw man argument that isn't relevant and isn't even worth addressing. But since you brought it up:
Jordan v. '98 Pacers - 46.7 FG%
Kobe v. '00 Pacers - 36.7 FG%
Oh look, percentages that aren't even close to 60%.
Who said they wouldn't?
The problem here is, the team of Jordan-Kobe-LeBron-Magic-Shaq would fatigue as a unit, chasing my team around (long before my lineup would on defense), simply because they'd be exerting more energy constantly running around, especially trying to cover for Shaq. The OP Dream Team would predominately score in ISO (well, certainly to a much greater degree than my lineup), meaning not every player on my team would be exerting energy on every defensive trip, especially since in the scheme where all they'd need to focus on is keeping them out of the paint and force jump shots.
My team on defense = staying in front and funneling to help, sticking to their zones, forcing jump-shots, and providing resistance in 1v1s
OP Dream Team on defense = running around screens, endlessly, all the way out to the 3-pt line, and having to deal with constant ball and player movement
Now tell me, which team is going to need to cover more distance and exert more energy on the defensive end?
Now your statements are getting nonsensical. Can you please stop saying I'm assuming shyt that I'm not? It's one straw man after another with you.
There's one thing you must remember here, that is pivotal in weighing up the chemistry, performance, and effectiveness of both of these teams in an isolated series - every single player on my team doesn't need the ball to be effective, in fact, 3-4 of my players are arguably more effective without it. While MJ, Kobe, and LeBron (can't really include Magic in this equation since he wasn't really effective without it) could play without the ball, they weren't nearly as effective without it, compared to their counterparts.
Now this matters because there's obviously only one ball - what are MJ, Kobe, Magic, and Shaq doing when LeBron has the ball: Shaq would typically be down by the low-post, Magic would be drifting from the mid-post to the perimeter, and MJ and Kobe would either be cutting to the rim, or simply hanging out by the perimeter waiting for their turn to handle the ball - all with minimal floor spacing. You then replace LeBron, with all the other players having the ball and you get similar scenarios - players hanging around their usual spots, aimlessly, all with a lack of floor spacing. Now while they're all great individual players in their own right, their effectiveness decreases when they don't have the ball, whereas almost every player on my team's effectiveness stays at an even keel regardless if they have the ball or not; constantly running around until they get open.
No amount of BBIQ is going to change that. All those players are who they are, and their style of play isn't going to change suddenly because they're on the same team together.
You are because I already clarified I listed Klay in parentheses because I feel he's interchangeable with Ray and Reggie. It shouldn't be a point of contention, yet you're framing most of your argument around Reggie's defense, but at the same time acknowledging Klay is a capable defender. shyt, take Reggie out and we'll replace him with Klay, and my argument still stays exactly the same.
Except the OP says pick five players, it doesn't say pick five players and a bench too. There's a reason why Magic, Shaq, Kobe, LeBron and MJ are the only five players listed, and no others. How could you possibly believe we're picking bench players too, when there's absolutely nothing that suggests so?
How in the fukk are you even debating this point? Why? You're just embarrassing yourself now.
Okay. They go 36-55 from 3 and beat the OP team 130-62 with Reggie and Ray putting Mike and Kobe in straightjackets. You good now?
- Wade
- T-Mac
- Kd
- AD
- Duncan or Dream. I think they would have a damn good chance to beat the team listed. They have enough long range shooting with KD and McGrady being able to light it up at any time from outside. Whoever Magic guards between KD and Davis is probably going to get 40 every night. Duncan or Dream would balance out Shaq I believe. And I think prime Wade and T-Mac could more then hold their own against Jordan and Kobe. Push come to shove you throw KD at them at times to switch things up as well.
- Wade
- T-Mac
- Kd
- AD
- Duncan or Dream. I think they would have a damn good chance to beat the team listed. They have enough long range shooting with KD and McGrady being able to light it up at any time from outside. Whoever Magic guards between KD and Davis is probably going to get 40 every night. Duncan or Dream would balance out Shaq I believe. And I think prime Wade and T-Mac could more then hold their own against Jordan and Kobe. Push come to shove you throw KD at them at times to switch things up as well.
feelosofer
#ninergang
I'm going to go a bit different.
Hakeem
David Robinson
Gary Payton
Grant Hill
Steph Curry
Hakeem
David Robinson
Gary Payton
Grant Hill
Steph Curry
Larry Lambo
Superstar
I'm not even going to attempt to defend this team and just try to outgun them
PG - Curry
SG - Ray Allen
SF - Reggie Miller
PF - KD
C - Bill Russell (need a rebounder)
They'd have to drop 130+ to win.
PG - Curry
SG - Ray Allen
SF - Reggie Miller
PF - KD
C - Bill Russell (need a rebounder)
They'd have to drop 130+ to win.
New Jeruzalem Journalist
Superstar
Jason Kidd - PG
Allen Iverson - SG
Julius Erving - SF
Tim Duncan - PF
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - C
Allen Iverson - SG
Julius Erving - SF
Tim Duncan - PF
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - C
It’s no team no one can put together to beat them. All that shooting that matter if u not getting clean shots.
KillerB88
Superstar
Russ, T-Mac, KD, Malone, The Admiral.
Gil Scott-Heroin
Veteran
Oh yeah, because Shaq and Magic were some lockdown defenders on the perimeter, who'd shadow off-ball movement all over the half-court; if you put Steph, Ray, Reggie (or Klay), and Durant on the court at the same time, there's no combination of defenders in NBA history that would stop them from getting open looks, let alone a Magic-Kobe-MJ-LeBron-Shaq lineup.