Top nba frontcourts in history

http://hoops-nation.com/community/topic/19492-best-front-court-in-the-nba-history/

Above site raises the question and many fans selected Celtic teams dating back to the 1960s with the1980s Bird, McHale and Parish teams leading the way. I would add the 1966-67 Philly 76ers to the list. On that team were frontcourters Wilt, Jackson,Walker,Cunningham and Gambee. Any Great frontcourts missed? Hard to believe but Bird, McHale, and Parish played together from 1980-81 to 1991-92 (12 yrs).

swish

Swish,

I agree with one of the posters on that site that points out that a frontcourt is a trio and not a duo.  So those who point to the duos of Robinson/Duncan and Hakeem/Sammpson are putting short of the hole.

It's hard to do this without blurring the lines between eras, and that is a bad way to go.  Different rules (handchecking), different conditions (buses vs private jets), different equipment (could you imagine Russell wearing today's Air Jordan's?), different league (8 teams playing each other again and again and again and...), different training/medicine (players don't need full-time jobs in the off season anymore. Also, could you imagine if players like Bill Walton and McHale could have gotten the same procedures on their feet Greg Oden has had?) all conspire to turn almost any reasonable answer into fruit cocktail.

Basketball is a 5-man game, so I'm not sure that parsing it this way will produce an answer that won't be out of context.  Still, there are 2-man games (Stockton/Malone) and the triangle is primarily a 3-man game, so this isn't completely out-of-left-field.


bob


.1

The first one that comes to mind is Bird - McHale - Parish. Tough to think of another one with that level of quality across all three positions.

The next that comes to mind is Russell and the other two forwards with him at the time. While Havlicek played both guard and forward, he did play forward, and he did play with Heinsohn, so actually Russell - Heinsohn - Havlicek sounds just as good, if not better, than Bird - McHale - Parish.

Here are the ones that come to mind from other teams.

Philly 1966-67: Wilt - Luke Jackson - Chet Walker/Billy Cunningham (the closest to the two Boston groups above)

LA 1971-72: Wilt - Jim McMillan - Happy Hairston (both McMillan and Hairston don't get their due)

LA late '80's: Kareem - Worthy - Rambis

Portland 1976-77: Bill Walton - Maurice Lucas - Bob Gross (Gross was an underrated, fine player; while he wasn't the same type of player as Rambis, he played a perfect complementary role like Rambis did)

Spurs 1998-99: Robinson - Duncan - Sean Elliott (people brought up the Robinson-Duncan duo but forget about Elliott)

bobheckler wrote:Still, there are 2-man games (Stockton/Malone) and the triangle is primarily a 3-man game, so this isn't completely out-of-left-field.

The triangle actually is one of the most equitable five-man offenses out there. Just because it's associated with Jordan and Kobe doesn't mean that it's designed to exploit a limited number of players. It's called the triangle because it's a triple-post offense, not because it's a three-man game.

Outside wrote:The first one that comes to mind is Bird - McHale - Parish. Tough to think of another one with that level of quality across all three positions.

The next that comes to mind is Russell and the other two forwards with him at the time. While Havlicek played both guard and forward, he did play forward, and he did play with Heinsohn, so actually Russell - Heinsohn - Havlicek sounds just as good, if not better, than Bird - McHale - Parish.

Here are the ones that come to mind from other teams.

Philly 1966-67: Wilt - Luke Jackson - Chet Walker/Billy Cunningham (the closest to the two Boston groups above)

LA 1971-72: Wilt - Jim McMillan - Happy Hairston (both McMillan and Hairston don't get their due)

LA late '80's: Kareem - Worthy - Rambis

Portland 1976-77: Bill Walton - Maurice Lucas - Bob Gross (Gross was an underrated, fine player; while he wasn't the same type of player as Rambis, he played a perfect complementary role like Rambis did)

Spurs 1998-99: Robinson - Duncan - Sean Elliott (people brought up the Robinson-Duncan duo but forget about Elliott)

Outside

Worthy additions to the greatest list. I would guess that all the teams have many supporters for number one.

swish

Outside wrote:

bobheckler wrote:Still, there are 2-man games (Stockton/Malone) and the triangle is primarily a 3-man game, so this isn't completely out-of-left-field.

The triangle actually is one of the most equitable five-man offenses out there. Just because it's associated with Jordan and Kobe doesn't mean that it's designed to exploit a limited number of players. It's called the triangle because it's a triple-post offense, not because it's a three-man game.

outside,

As I understand the triangle, you have a low post player (usually Gasol) and a player at the top (usually Kobe) and a player out at 3pt line near the corner (TAFKARA or D-Fish or Blake).  There's your 3-man triangle.  On the weak side of the floor you have another low post player (previously Bynum) and another guard out near 3 (either TAFKARA or D-Fish or Blake) who, if/when the ball is rotated to that side can play a 2-man game (or, if the defense overshifted, just take the shot when the ball comes to them) OR the top player (Kobe) can shift and play the top man on a triangle on that side of the floor, now the strong side.

Where is your 3rd post player, or am I all wet above?


bob


.

bobheckler wrote:outside,

As I understand the triangle, you have a low post player (usually Gasol) and a player at the top (usually Kobe) and a player out at 3pt line near the corner (TAFKARA or D-Fish or Blake).  There's your 3-man triangle.  On the weak side of the floor you have another low post player (previously Bynum) and another guard out near 3 (either TAFKARA or D-Fish or Blake) who, if/when the ball is rotated to that side can play a 2-man game (or, if the defense overshifted, just take the shot when the ball comes to them) OR the top player (Kobe) can shift and play the top man on a triangle on that side of the floor, now the strong side.

Where is your 3rd post player, or am I all wet above?

Although it's called the triple-post, your initial description of the triangle created by a post, corner, and wing player is essentially correct (although the post player often sets up in the mid or high post rather than low post). It's not that it has three players in the post, so in that respect, "triangle" is more descriptive than "triple post," but I believe "triple post" is what Sam Barry (considered the originator of the offense) and Tex Winter (who refined it) usually called it.

The keys to the triangle are:

• Spacing. The five positions -- the three in the triangle, a guard at the top of the key, and another player on the weak side -- are sufficiently spaced to prevent double-teaming without leaving a man open.

• Player and ball movement. Although the objective is to continually fill the five desired positions, players cut a lot and move from one position to another. The classic initial pass is to the player in the mid-post, but he's in prime position to pass the ball to any other player, and the ball can move freely around.

• Unpredictability. While the offense is designed to get bulk of the shots from the three players in the triangle, it's unpredictable because it's designed to react to what the defense does rather than follow set plays. In that sense, it's not traditional because it doesn't depend on a point guard to initiate it or screens to get players open.

Although talent on the teams famous for the triangle wasn't equitable, the offense itself increases opportunities for every player. On the Bulls teams, Jordan was obviously the primary scorer, but they usually had six or seven players scoring seven points or more per game. Maybe the best example is the year Jordan didn't play (1993-94), when they had nine players score seven or more and 11 score five or more per game. That compares well with the 2007-08 Celtics, an excellent example of team play and distributed scoring, which had eight players score seven or more and 10 players score five or more.

Another example of the equal opportunity nature of the triangle is how it adapts to the talent of different teams. With the Bulls, you don't think of scoring centers, but as Phil told Shaq, it's actually great for big men who can score, as Shaq, and later Pau and Bynum, showed.

As far as I know, only the Phil-Tex Winter combo has been successful with the triangle in the NBA and everyone else who has tried it has failed, but the other teams that tried it weren't exactly deep with talent, and nothing is going to work without that. Despite the triangle's limited success, I've always been a fan of its concepts.

Outside

Your below point about the offense not relying on a traditional point guard approach to the offence is clearly demostrated by the lowly assist figures of the "point" guards of those Bulls and Laker teams.

"Unpredictability. While the offense is designed to get bulk of the shots from the three players in the triangle, it's unpredictable because it's designed to react to what the defense does rather than follow set plays. In that sense, it's not traditional because it doesn't depend on a point guard to initiate it or screens to get players open."

swish