Well than I will take off Zo if that's the case since he isn't deserving to be on that list either. I was just looking for players that can shot block, defend, and rebound and not the overall player but you go right to the player comparisons.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clutch_Melo_061 @ Apr 18 2006, 02:04 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nitro don't you learn? Anyone who plays on the mavs is destined to be an all time great.edit: Ok, Nitro answer me this question. Pick any superstar swingman in the league and put him in Duncan's place in 2003. Would the spurs win the championship? i don't think so. Big men like Shaq clog up the middle and make it easier for players.</div>The Spurs team was built around TD, which took years of draft picks and FA's. A team could be built around a superstar swingman just as easily. With a few more role players, the players outside Bron would be similar to TD's 2003 team. TD also had an easy road that year, beating a weakened LA team in playoffs, and fairly weak NJ team in Finals. I still feel superstar swingman are just as valuable, and more productive than all star big man.
It depends on a player. They all can be built around. A superstar shooting guard you probably would surround him with. PG spot up shooter and great defenderSF Slasher with some outside shot.PF rebounder and outside shotC rebounder and shot blocker. With a big man it is already proven with the spurs how you build around them.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Nitro1118 @ Apr 18 2006, 08:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I still feel superstar swingman are just as valuable, and more productive than all star big man.</div>i agree with this statement. not only can they handle the ball, they can also make free throws at the end of games. Look at ft% of Shaq and Tim Duncan, then Look at Kobe's and Lebron's. They also have an easier time when making game winning shots.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Clutch_Melo_061 @ Apr 16 2006, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Big men are more important than Swingman, that is why if i were starting a franchise i'd take Hakeem over MJ.</div>NO NO NO.....u ussually start a team with a good big man but not in this case. The reason to take big men in the first place is because most championships are won with a big men...i will give you that. But MJ still won 6 ships with out a good big guy(Luke Longly). MJ is the best player in the history of the game....there is no doubt ANYBODY would take him first....at least i hope
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ballerman2112 @ Apr 18 2006, 11:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>NO NO NO.....u ussually start a team with a good big man but not in this case. The reason to take big men in the first place is because most championships are won with a big men...i will give you that. But MJ still won 6 ships with out a good big guy(Luke Longly). MJ is the best player in the history of the game....there is no doubt ANYBODY would take him first....at least i hope</div>Man this has gone so far off topic....wat happend to naming players like lebron or kobe and debating why you would take them?
