Should a big men ever be considered a 1st option?

kingfish · August 10, 2009

You have guys like Duncan and KG that have won a championship but not really sure if their a 1st option. Duncan was very impressive in the Spurs playoff runs but you also had Parker/Ginobli who did much of the scoring and playmaking for them. Sure you could give the ball to Duncan in the post quite often but it wasnt something you would do every time down the floor, especially when going up against other great big men. Parker was the one that created offense for everyone and tormented teams off the dribble. Ginobli also did the same but had a lot more clutch shots. This makes me believe Duncan was a 2nd option to either of them or both of them combined.

KG might alse be considered a 2nd option. He was a key ingredient to the Celtics winning a title, but he didnt perform great in the playoffs and Pierce actually had the best finals performance. Pierce made most of the clutch shots and created for everyone else. Shaq might be the only exception, he was very dominant in his prime. Neither Duncan or KG have the same impact Shaq had on the Lakers. Kobe still created for everyone else and had all the clutch shots, but for the sake of avoiding a huge different argument ill say Shaq was the 1st option for now. My point is you would probably take Duncan or KG before taking Pierce or Tony Parker, because of what they can do on defense and rebounding. But on offense you would probably consider Parker/Pierce the 1st option right?

AtTheDriveIn · August 10, 2009

I don't know what games you were watching, but I've always consider Tim Duncan to be the first option down the court on every play. I think Gregg Poppovich would agree with me as everything the Spurs do run from the inside out, or from Duncan to other players. That's the definition of being an 'option' offensively. It's not about who scores the most points, rather it's about first going to what works the best in your offense and then finding other options if your first option, for reasons like double-teaming, or being trapped etc., is caught in a situation where he can't create.

Duncan, for 3 and a half quarters of the game, is the teams main option, and the one player that all his teammates are looking for. It's obvious when you watch games. Unless they're running some set isolation play, or was a pick and pop/roll with either of their bigs, they're always going to Duncan to see what he's up to before proceeding with anything else on the court.

The obvious reasons they don't go to Duncan in clutch situations is that with the banning of the handcheck, it's much easier for guards to score points in a hurry now. Take Monta Ellis, for example, blazing speed, no real strong mid-range or three point game, but is still scoring 20 points per game on getting to the rim and passing by his defender with ease. It's because when you have a Tony Parker or someone as crafty as Manu Ginobili, it's easier to create from the outside in. However, if you continually do it, then come clutch time, the defense will have figured you out, but no defense can ever really figure out an effective post-offense for the other quarters, which is why teams who have established guys in the post go to them first. Also, obviously not all, but most post-players are notoriously poor defenders and in situations where they need to come up with two points, they may only be able to give you one because defenses will just collapse and not allow a shot to go up or a pass to get out of the post.

As to whether or not big men should be consider first options; of course they should. When you have a dominant player inside, you don't not go to them. Even O'Neal now can still score plenty of points when you give him the ball. That's the effectiveness of post players.

MainEv3nt · August 10, 2009

tim duncan always been the first option u used a bad example lol.

the only time he mighta been 2nd option was last seasons playoffs.

in the spurs title runs, he always got going first then it was tp an manu next to follow.

TheNextBestThing · August 10, 2009

Wilt Chamberlain

Shaquille O'Neal

Hakeem Olajuwon

Charles Barkley

Karl Malone

Ralph Sampson

George Mikan (Basically the team's only option)

Patrick Ewing

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

billt chamberlain · August 10, 2009

shaq with the lakers is probably the best example of a big man being a number one option. wasn't hakeem and david robinson both number one options for their teams?

Built Ford Tough · August 10, 2009

shaq with the lakers is probably the best example of a big man being a number one option. wasn't hakeem and david robinson both number one options for their teams?

Yes to both of them. Robinson was the first option on the Spurs for basically his entire career up until Duncan came into the league. Hakeem was the first option for the majority of his career as well.

And is this thread a joke? Of course big men shoudl be considered a 1st option if they are skilled enouggh. Off of the top of my head you have:

Shaquille O'Neal

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Wilt Chamberlain

Hakeem Olajuwon

David Robinson

Tim Duncan

Karl Malone

Charles Barkley

George Mikan

Brad Daugherty

Alonzo Mourning

Dirk Nowitzki

Chris Webber

Rasheed Wallace

Ralph Sampson

All of these players were/are number one options on good/great/championship teams. Do you think that it is a coincidence that teams with dominant big men are usually the ones that go deep into the playoffs? The rule changes have made the NBA a more guard oriented league but I would still take the dominant big man over the dominant swingman any day of the week because big men have a larger impact on the game.

Edited August 10, 2009 by Built Ford Tough

xx. · August 10, 2009

Kingfish doesn't know anything about the league outside from the Lakers.

kingfish · August 11, 2009

Pierce is the 1st option, not KG. Parker is the 1st option, not Duncan. That simple.

Built Ford Tough · August 11, 2009

Pierce is the 1st option, not KG. Parker is the 1st option, not Duncan. That simple.

What are KG and Duncan the only big men in the history of the NBA or something?

What about when Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal were all number one options on Championship teams?

What about when Wilt Chamberlain, Karl Malone, Charles Barkley, Dirk Nowitzki, Chris Webber, David Robinson, Rasheed Wallace, Brad Daugherty, Alonzo Mourning and Ralph Sampson, just to name a few, were all leading their teams to the playoffs, and in some cases, even the NBA Finals? Were none of these guys the first options on their teams or what? Get a clue please because you are talking out of your [expletive] dude (no offense intended).

Besides, every Championship that the Spurs won Duncan was the undisputed 1st option on the floor and everybody knows that (well, aside from you apperantly). Just look at the damn numbers and it proves it:

2006/07:

Regular Season:

Tim Duncan: 20.0 ppg on 14.1 FGA (54.6 FG%)

Tony Parker: 18.6 ppg on 14.2 FGA (52.0 FG%)

Manu Ginobili: 16.5 ppg on 11.4 FGA (46.4 FG%)

Playoffs:

Tim Duncan: 22.2 ppg on 16.7 FGA (52.1 FG%)

Tony Parker: 20.8 ppg on 17.5 FGA (48.0 FG%)

Manu Ginobili: 16.7 ppg on 12.4 FGA (40.1 FG%)

2004/05:

Regular Season:

Tim Duncan: 20.3 ppg on 15.8 FGA (49.8 FG%)

Tony Parker: 16.3 ppg on 14 FGA (48.2 FG%)

Manu Ginobili: 16 ppg on 10 FGA (47.1 FG%)

Playoffs:

Tim Duncan: 23.6 ppg on 18 FGA (47.0 FG%)

Manu Ginobili: 20.8 ppg on 12.5 FGA (50 FG%)

Tony Parker: 17.2 ppg on 15.9 FGA (45.4 FG%)

2002/03:

Regular Season:

Tim Duncan: 23.3 ppg on 17.2 FGA (51.3 FG%)

Tony Parker: 15.5 ppg on 12.7 FGA (46.4 FG%)

Stephen Jackson: 11.8 ppg on 10.2 FGA (43.5 FG%)

Playoffs:

Tim Duncan: 24.7 ppg on 17.1 FGA (52.9 FG%)

Tony Parker: 14.7 ppg on 14 FGA (40.3 FG%)

Stephen Jackson: 12.8 ppg on 10.9 FGA (41.4 FG%)

1998/99:

Regular Season

Tim Duncan: 21.7 ppg on 16.9 FGA (49.5 FG%)

David Robinson: 15.8 ppg on 10.8 FGA (50.9 FG%)

Sean Elliot: 11.2 ppg on 10.1 FGA (41 FG%)

Playoffs:

Tim Duncan: 23.2 ppg on 16.6 FGA (51.1 FG%)

David Robinson: 15.6 on 10.6 FGA (48.3 FG%)

Avery Johnson: 12.6 ppg on 11 FGA (48.7 FG%)

So what is the common denomenator in all of the Spurs Championships? Well as far as I can see, it is that Tim Duncan was the leading scorer and most efficient player during the regular season and the playoffs of each and every single one of the Spurs Championships. The only one that is even close to being questionable as to who was the number one option was the 06/07 season but even then, Duncan scored more and did it more efficiently than Parker.

Honestly though, screw the numbers and just watch the Spurs play the game. Up until this past season, the Spurs ran basically everything through Duncan. They would feed him in the post and he would go to work on the other teams defense. If they played him straight up he would attack them with his vast array of post moves or step outside and hit his masterfull bank shot from the wing. If they sent a double team his way then TD would make use of his excellent court awareness, basketball IQ and passing ability to find the open man whether it was a shooter out on the perimeter or a guard cutting into the paint. Even when Duncan didn't have the ball in his hands he was still a focal point of the opposing defenses when he would go and set a screen up top for Parker or Ginobili because they were worried about him rolling to the rim or fading to the wing for his lethal bank shot.

This past season is the only season that you can have any sort of legitimate argument that Tim Duncan was not the number one option for the Spurs. That is it. Every other season of his 12 year career, Tim Duncan has been the undisputed number one option for the San Antonio Spurs and he has led them to 4 Championships during those 12 seasons.

Honestly, its pretty pathetic that somebody even needs to explain to you that big men should be considered number one options when you consider the fact that almost every single Championship caliber team has a dominant big man leading the way. Just because they aren't the ones taking last minute shots doesn't mean that they aren't the first option on the floor.

The rules have changed over the past few years and it has made the NBA more of a guard dominant league, but that doesn't change the fact that historically, big men are the ones that lead teams to Championships.

kingfish · August 11, 2009

You hit the nail on the head with the last part. Im talking about right NOW. Theres a reason I mentioned KG and Duncan only.