Great players you didn't and don't have to build teams around

[elementally morale]

Let's talk about stars. Not role players. Stars who were successful and you didn't have to build a team for them to be successful. Stars that could work with whoever was there.

I think this list is short. As great as he was, you had to build for Shaq. You definitely have to build for LeBron. Shooters. Kobe? Absolutely. He needed that great big. Barkley? Well, he didn't win. Jordan? Sorry but you had to build for MJ, too.

So who do I have in mind?

Magic
Bird
Duncan
Hakeem

and

Luka seems to be just like that.


Now. I'm sure this list can and will get longer... but who would you guys add? I was thinking of Steve Nash... but he needed fast pace and running teammates plus he didn't win. Never been to a finals. So no. Does Steph Curry belong? How about Kawhi Leonard? Dirk Nowitzki?



You tell me. Rules are clear. Not the best players ever... just successful stars you didn't have to build a team around.

[STATUTORY]

Lebron is a player that you simply couldn't build a team around. Cause he will make sure you play Bran ball no matter the personnel

that's a part why he always needed "more help" cause he never maximized the potential of talent he had around him and therefore the whole was always less than the sum the parts.

Lebron still manage to win rings because the amount of talent he had on the teams simply overcame the lack of synergy and deficiency in coordination

[MaxPlayer]

Lebron is a player that you simply couldn't build a team around. Cause he will make sure you play Bran ball no matter the personnel

that's a part why he always needed "more help" cause he never maximized the potential of talent he had around him and therefore the whole was always less than the sum the parts.

LOL someone didn't read the rules.

[elementally morale]

Lebron is a player that you simply couldn't build a team around. Cause he will make sure you play Bran ball no matter the personnel

that's a part why he always needed "more help" cause he never maximized the potential of talent he had around him and therefore the whole was always less than the sum the parts.

You definitely could build for LeBron. He won multiple times. That's proof. But this is not a LeBron thread. We are looking for players who you did NOT have to build around. And LeBron is not one of them. So let's talk about LeBron James in the other 1,233,574 threads. Thx.

[warriorfan]

It is easier to insert Kawhi Leonard on a good team and win a chip than it is to have LeBron and custom hand pick everyone around him for his particular needs

The term that used to be used on RealGM about this was

[elementally morale]

[QUOTE=warriorfan]It is easier to insert Kawhi Leonard on a good team and win a chip than it is to have LeBron and custom hand pick everyone around him for his particular needs

The term that used to be used on RealGM about this was

[SouBeachTalents]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous, even 3 of the players you mentioned had some of the most consistently talented rosters and management around them for nearly their entire careers. I don't care who you are, every player needs a talented roster around them in order to win championships. You have the extremely rare examples where it does occur ('94 Hakeem, '03 Duncan, 2011 Dirk) but outside of one year aberrations, to win multiple championships, no player can accomplish that without a legitimate squad around them

[warriorfan]

LeBron is not in this conversation. You guys don't have to bring him up. Kobe is also not in this conversation. MJ isn't in the conversation either. You will have to come up with other names.

I did. Kawhi Leonard.

I was explaining how LeBron does not fit the criteria you gave...

[elementally morale]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous, even 3 of the players you mentioned had some of the most consistently talented rosters and management around them for nearly their entire careers. I don't care who you are, every player needs a talented roster around them in order to win championships. You have the extremely rare examples where it does occur ('94 Hakeem, '03 Duncan, 2011 Dirk) but outside of one year aberrations, to win multiple championships, no player can accomplish that without a legitimate squad around them


Talented players, yes. Sure. You need good teammates. But Magic could work with any set of teammates, not specialists. On the other hand, a guy like Shaq needed a certain type of teammate. So there is a difference.

Duncan could work with David Robinson. And also Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. That's different than most stars ,who need a certain type of talent around them in order to be successful.

[elementally morale]

I did. Kawhi Leonard.

I was explaining how LeBron does not fit the criteria you gave...


He sure does not. Kawhi I had in the thread opener... so you cast your vote, okay. How about Steph Curry? I think he may belong... we shall see when he returns to action.

Who else?

[tontoz]

Steph. He is elite with or without the ball. He fits with an off ball player like Klay but can also play with a ball dominant player because his off ball game is so good.

[elementally morale]

Lebron won chips because the amount of talent he had on the teams simply overcame the lack of synergy and deficiency in coordination


Look. One more time. We both know LeBron doesn't belong. So no need to discuss him here. Same with Kobe and MJ. None of these players are good examples. Yao Ming and Stephon Marbury don't belong either... so the amount you talk of them should be about the amount you talk LeBron in here.

[Manny98]

Lakers currently rank 27th in the league in 3 point percentage yet have the best record in the league and LeBron is having a MVP level season.

So this idea that LeBron NEEDS shooters to succeed is completely false

[egokiller]

You didn't have to build around MJ. You give him a player that is average and he molds them into the teammate they need to be by his own doing and own personal time. If MJ thought a better big man was needed, he would have pulled Cartwright to his side and made Bill come to his house every day to practice and workout before actual practice like he did with Pippen. MJ however was so GOAT that a team didn't need to be built around him so the bulls didn't need a dominant big man to win, unlike all the other teams during his era.

[warriorfan]

He sure does not. Kawhi I had in the thread opener... so you cast your vote, okay. How about Steph Curry? I think he may belong... we shall see when he returns to action.

Who else?

For Curry I would vote yes because of his ability to raise the level of offenses. Steph Curry orchestrated one of the greatest offenses of all time with Klay Thompson, Harrison Barnes, and Draymond Green....Outside of Klay

[elementally morale]

Steph. He is elite with or without the ball. He fits with an off ball player like Klay but can also play with a ball dominant player because his off ball game is so good.


Yes, I also had him in the thread opener. I tend to think Curry belongs... but I need to see him get back to the Finals or at least 2-3 WCFs witn a different set of players first. But I think he has a good case. So people I think have a good case are:

Magic
Bird
Hakeem
Duncan


Kawhi (?)
Curry (?)
Luka (?)

Should we add Dirk? I don't know. I'm not sold on him. Yes, he won that one time... and yes, ha could work with anyone... but was he successful enough save for that one year he won? I think he wasn't.

[MaxPlayer]

The premise of this thread is ridiculous, even 3 of the players you mentioned had some of the most consistently talented rosters and management around them for nearly their entire careers. I don't care who you are, every player needs a talented roster around them in order to win championships. You have the extremely rare examples where it does occur ('94 Hakeem, '03 Duncan, 2011 Dirk) but outside of one year aberrations, to win multiple championships, no player can accomplish that without a legitimate squad around them

I think there's SOMETHING to it. Like, take one end of the spectrum you have a guy like AI where you HAVE to have a big guard next to him to defend SGs, and you HAVE to have a great offensive rebounder or 2 to grab his misses and you CAN'T have another high-usage guy, etc.

There are a couple of obvious problems with this:

1.) It can be hard to fill out a roster with the particular archetypes of players that you need.

2.) If the star player you're building around gets hurt or leaves, the remaining pieces may not comprise a functional team.

Different sport, but I feel like this is a big part of a reason why a guy like Tim Tebow never really got another shot as a QB. Maybe he could have been effective... if a franchise committed to building its entire offense around his unique skillset. But if he got hurt, then you'd be totally screwed because no one else could do what he did, and you'd be left with a bunch unoptimized parts. No one was willing to take such a risky approach.

[SouBeachTalents]

Talented players, yes. Sure. You need good teammates. But Magic could work with any set of teammates, not specialists. On the other hand, a guy like Shaq needed a certain type of teammate. So there is a difference.

Duncan could work with David Robinson. And also Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. That's different than most stars ,who need a certain type of talent around them in order to be successful.
So you basically mean players you wouldn't need a specific blueprint to build around?

Off the top of my head, obviously assuming they have a championship caliber squad

Magic
Curry
Jordan
Bird
Kawhi
Dirk
Kareem
Shaq
Duncan
Hakeem

[elementally morale]

Lakers currently rank 27th in the league in 3 point percentage yet have the best record in the league and LeBron is having a MVP level season.

So this idea that LeBron NEEDS shooters to succeed is completely false


It may be false but there is a guy with the name Davis on the back of his jersey. Plus it is one year and 15 games... not a big enough sample. LeBron's career is a bigger sample... and it looks he needed all the help in the world and specialist around him.

[elementally morale]

You didn't have to build around MJ. You give him a player that is average and he molds them into the teammate they need to be by his own doing and own personal time. If MJ thought a better big man was needed, he would have pulled Cartwright to his side and made Bill come to his house every day to practice and workout before actual practice like he did with Pippen. MJ however was so GOAT that a team didn't need to be built around him so the bulls didn't need a dominant big man to win, unlike all the other teams during his era.


I saw MJ's whole career. I wasn't a fan. I didn't like him at all. I was a Laker fan. I do think, however, that MJ is the best player I've ever seen so far. It was a bad decision on my part to hate on him... I missed some great entertainment.

Still... I remember his career differently. I think he needed a set of good defenders. I'm not sure how much he needed the triangle offense... but all his success came with Tex Winter and Phil Jackson. (Same with Kobe, btw.)

So you guys may add MJ if you really feel that way... I don't.

[Trollsmasher]

[QUOTE=warriorfan]It is easier to insert Kawhi Leonard on a good team and win a chip than it is to have LeBron and custom hand pick everyone around him for his particular needs

The term that used to be used on RealGM about this was

[elementally morale]

lebron has never been inserted into a good team

all the teams he has ever entered were hot garbage


Like Miami with Wade and Bosh? :oldlol:

LeBron is not a good example here. He is a good example for a lot of things but not a good example in this thread.

[warriorfan]

lebron has never been inserted into a good team

all the teams he has ever entered were hot garbage

Even if that statement was true(which it is not). We have seen well enough of his playstyle to see he needs a particular set of skills around him. He needs shooters, especially stretch Bigs. No post occupying big men. No one to split the time of possession with him like a true point guard. You need to customize a team around him and there seems to be never enough help for him. He doesn

[elementally morale]

So you basically mean players you wouldn't need a specific blueprint to build around?

Off the top of my head, obviously assuming they have a championship caliber squad

Magic
Curry
Jordan
Bird
Kawhi
Dirk
Kareem
Shaq
Duncan
Hakeem


The bolded I don't agree with. Shaq needed shooters and a great wing. Dirk was very good but not great. He had a great run in one year and I'm happ for him. Very nice guy all around. I just don't think he was successful enough throughout his career with any set of players. He could work with any set... yes. But not successful enough.

Curry and Kawhi I don't know yet. Need 2 more years to determine. With MJ... I'm on the fence. He may be a good example after all. I never liked him... it may cloud my judgement.

[egokiller]

I saw MJ's whole career. I wasn't a fan. I didn't like him at all. I was a Laker fan. I do think, however, that MJ is the best player I've ever seen so far. It was a bad decision on my part to hate on him... I missed some great entertainment.

Still... I remember his career differently. I think he needed a set of good defenders. I'm not sure how much he needed the triangle offense... but all his success came with Tex Winter and Phil Jackson. (Same with Kobe, btw.)

So you guys may add MJ if you really feel that way... I don't.

Why would a guy like MJ who actually won DPOY need more defenders on his team than a guy who never won DPOY? How does that logic work? If anything, it proves that MJ needed a lesser set of good defenders than any of the guys you mentioned that never won DPOY because his own defense made up for it.

The fact that MJ was able to win with the triangle offense just proves how GOAT he was. The opposition KNEW what offense he was going to run and still couldn't stop it.

[elementally morale]

On another note per LeBron James.

He had the talent to be a good example here. The way he played in his fisrt 2-3 years and the way he plays this very year... those are great examples. So with him... I think he made a bad decision becoming a scorer. He should and could have played the game the Magic-way. LeBron had Magic-like talent. He could've been a lot more successful had he played like he plays this year. So on a talent alone basis, LeBron belongs here. But as for what actually happened he does not.

[elementally morale]

The fact that MJ was able to win with the triangle offense just proves how GOAT he was. The opposition KNEW what offense he was going to run and still couldn't stop it.


I never said he wasn't the greatest I've seen. I said the opposite. I just think he is not the best example here. Then again... my judgement may be clouded. I have no problem someone adding Jordan. Just never add Kobe, please. :oldlol:

[tontoz]

I certainly think Dirk belongs. As a stretch 4 he wasn't just an great scorer. The spacing he created helped the rest of the team. He wasn't really a ball dominant player which let other players get theirs.

I think people get too caught up in titles. A lot of things have to go right to win a title.

[elementally morale]

I certainly think Dirk belongs. As a stretch 4 he wasn't just an great scorer. The spacing he created helped the rest of the team. He wasn't really a ball dominant player which let other players get theirs.

I think people get too caught up in titles. A lot of things have to go right to win a title.


I kinda agree with your last paragraph. Still, I'm not sure Dirk was great enough. He fits 50% of the criteria for sure. He could work with anyone. The other half is having been great. Not just very good. And I'm not sure he was greater than Steve Nash who btw was my favorite player for years. And Nash was very very good with different set of players... I'm just not sure he was really great. I'm having the same problem with Steph Curry... but Curry has time to prove me wrong and Nash's time is already up.

Anyway... what is your full list then?

[tontoz]

I don't have a full list. You are more stringent on the "great" label than I am.

I would consider Reggie Miller for this list but i doubt you consider him great. Ray Allen as well. Nash works for me too.

[SouBeachTalents]

The bolded I don't agree with. Shaq needed shooters and a great wing. Dirk was very good but not great. He had a great run in one year and I'm happ for him. Very nice guy all around. I just don't think he was successful enough throughout his career with any set of players. He could work with any set... yes. But not successful enough.

Curry and Kawhi I don't know yet. Need 2 more years to determine. With MJ... I'm on the fence. He may be a good example after all. I never liked him... it may cloud my judgement.
I don't even dispute pairing Shaq with a great, high scoring wing, especially one that can close, isn't the best way to build around him. But just because that's all we saw him play with throughout the majority of his career, doesn't mean he couldn't achieve success in a different set up. You give peak Shaq a point like Nash/CP3, or a big like Dirk/KG/Duncan, you really don't think he could win a couple of championships?

And in fairness to Dirk, of the players I mentioned (besides Hakeem) he played with by FAR the least amount of talent, yet managed to win 50-60 games year after year in the brutal West without another true superstar caliber player beside him the bulk of his prime years. You give him the caliber of players most ATG's played with, I'm sure he'd be able to rack up more than one title

What's your opinion on Durant? I think he definitely has the skillset to be able to blend in seamlessly into pretty much any team, but the fact his only titles occurred under the easiest circumstances possible and he failed to win multiple years with a talented OKC team would definitely give me some hindrance

[elementally morale]

Imagining Shaq with David Robinson is a lot harder for me than to imagine Duncan with Robinson (which I saw) or Hakeem with Robinson (which I can easily imagine). You made a good point though: sometimes we need to imagine things in order to talk about potential... and in this thread I was talking about how it actually went down in my opinion.

Durant? Maybe. I watch as little Durant as I possibly can. He is a good player and I'll leave it at that.

[Hey Yo]

It may be false but there is a guy with the name Davis on the back of his jersey. Plus it is one year and 15 games... not a big enough sample. LeBron's career is a bigger sample... and it looks he needed all the help in the world and specialist around him.
And Magic didn't have a guy with the name of Jabbar on the back of his?

Also you said Magic showed he could work with any type of teammates. What year(s) did that happen??

[NBASTATMAN]

Lebron is a player that you simply couldn't build a team around. Cause he will make sure you play Bran ball no matter the personnel

that's a part why he always needed "more help" cause he never maximized the potential of talent he had around him and therefore the whole was always less than the sum the parts.

Lebron still manage to win rings because the amount of talent he had on the teams simply overcame the lack of synergy and deficiency in coordination


DUDE CAN YOU READ?.. OH WAIT LEBRON IS ON YOUR MIND ALL THE TIME :roll: :banana: :applause:




I think STEPH CURRY was a guy you didnt have to build around and so is Klay Thompson..

[elementally morale]

And Magic didn't have a guy with the name of Jabbar on the back of his?

Also you said Magic showed he could work with any type of teammates. What year(s) did that happen??


With Divac. Had HIV not been there I think Magic and Divac would've won together. They needed one good wing player to replace Worthy or Scott.

[warriorfan]

Kevin Garnett. Looking back he had some pretty shitty teams in Minnesota while playing in a brutal conference. He immediately won it all as soon as he joined Boston. He probably should have won the FMVP too.

[tpols]

Kevin Garnett. Looking back he had some pretty shitty teams in Minnesota while playing in a brutal conference. He immediately won it all as soon as he joined Boston. He probably should have won the FMVP too.


to be fair he joined ray allen and paul pierce in a weak east.

any great player would have tremendous odds in that situation, but i agree with garnett being underrated.

[elementally morale]

to be fair he joined ray allen and paul pierce in a weak east.

any great player would have tremendous odds in that situation, but i agree with garnett being underrated.


Garnett for me is... Dirk. Very very good. If I put one on the list I have to put the other one there, too. I'm a bit reluctant... if I do I have to put them near the bottom.

But this list is very hard to make. I'm not sure I have more than 10 players I can put on it. A lot harder than an all time top 25 for me.

[Hey Yo]

With Divac. Had HIV not been there I think Magic and Divac would've won together. They needed one good wing player to replace Worthy or Scott.
So he showed he can play with a big who can score inside and outside + rebound? Yeah, Magic never played with that kind of player before Vlade. That's a lot of adaptation for him.


:facepalm

[elementally morale]

I think I have a good example, finally.

Jason Kidd

[elementally morale]

So he showed he can play with a big who can score inside and outside + rebound? Yeah, Magic never played with that kind of player before Vlade. That's a lot of adaptation for him.

I saw Magic play. You were not alive then. You are free to make your own list though. You can leave out Magic and put LeBron on the list. I won't agree with it... yet you are welcome.

So.. what is your list then?

[egokiller]

And Magic didn't have a guy with the name of Jabbar on the back of his?

Also you said Magic showed he could work with any type of teammates. What year(s) did that happen??

Did Magic speak to Jabbar behind the scenes and conspire to join up on a completely different team that neither one of them had ever played on? LOL at pretending Magic is the POS "colluder" that Lebron is and continues to be.

[egokiller]

I never said he wasn't the greatest I've seen. I said the opposite. I just think he is not the best example here. Then again... my judgement may be clouded. I have no problem someone adding Jordan. Just never add Kobe, please. :oldlol:

Fair enough

[ArbitraryWater]

I think I have a good example, finally.

Jason Kidd

Yeah, Dirk isn't good enough, but hey, we got Jason Kidd!

[tpols]

Yeah, Dirk isn't good enough, but hey, we got Jason Kidd!


prime kidd was on dirk's level. he was a genius.

[elementally morale]

prime kidd was on dirk's level. he was a genius.


Peak Kidd I think had a bit more impact on the team than any version of Dirk. Not only did he orchestra great offense he was also a great defender. I think Kidd is a better example than Dirk. But Dirk is... fine for this list, I guess.

[Hey Yo]

I saw Magic play. You were not alive then. You are free to make your own list though. You can leave out Magic and put LeBron on the list. I won't agree with it... yet you are welcome.

So.. what is your list then?
Ahhhhhh the old " you weren't alive... you didnt see him play :oldlol:

I dont need to make a list. Players need teammates who can score and some who can play defense to be successful. If you're implying that Magic proved he could win with below avg players, what years were they?

So what type of player was Vade that made him completely different than any other teammate that Magic ever played with? What made his adaptation so visibly impressive??

[SouBeachTalents]

Did Magic speak to Jabbar behind the scenes and conspire to join up on a completely different team that neither one of them had ever played on? LOL at pretending Magic is the POS "colluder" that Lebron is and continues to be.
Magic said he wouldn't have gone to the NBA after his sophomore year unless he got to play with the Lakers. He would've literally forgone the draft and returned to Michigan St if he didn't get to immediately join the best player in the world

Magic Johnson would have returned to Michigan State rather than play for the Chicago Bulls.
“I’d have stayed in school,” he said here Tuesday, standing alone outside Gate 3 1/2 of Chicago Stadium, the house that could have been his. “A coin toss changed the course of my whole life.”

I wouldn’t have played here,” Johnson said on the eve of Game 2 of the NBA finals between his team and the team that could have been his. “The only reason I came out was to play with Kareem and the Lakers.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1991-06-05-sp-83-story.html

[elementally morale]

Ahhhhhh the old " you weren't alive... you didnt see him play :oldlol:

Actually, yes.

The more basketball you saw the better you become at rating and understandong what you see. Age is not the only thing here but an important thing. Having watced 5 games in your life is obviously not enough. 5 years is better. You know that. Well... 35 years is a lot more than 5.

[egokiller]

Magic said he wouldn't have gone to the NBA after his sophomore year unless he got to play with the Lakers.

Are you trying to equate wanting to play for your favorite team since you were a kid to being a colluding POS and talking to Jabbar behind the scenes and conspiring to go there?

Are we trying to re-write history and degrade players to the level of lebron james and KD now? :lol

[Hey Yo]

Actually, yes.

The more basketball you saw the better you become at rating and understandong what you see. Age is not the only thing here but an important thing. Having watced 5 games in your life is obviously not enough. 5 years is better. You know that. Well... 35 years is a lot more than 5.
Just as I thought..... the so called expert of basketball has no answer as to why he thinks Magic never played with a player like Vlade. What made Vlade so unique that Magic had to overhaul the entire way he approached the game.

Truth is, Magic never had to play with below avg. teammates. We never saw him on those Clipp or GSW shit type teams in his division and have instant success.

Not saying he couldn't but we never saw him do it

[sd3035]

Curry and Nash

[Hey Yo]

Are you trying to equate wanting to play for your favorite team since you were a kid to being a colluding POS and talking to Jabbar behind the scenes and conspiring to go there?

Are we trying to re-write history and degrade players to the level of lebron james and KD now? :lol
Link to Lakers being Magic's favorite team when he was a kid??

Thanks

[elementally morale]

Just as I thought..... the so called expert of basketball has no answer as to why he thinks Magic never played with a player like Vlade. What made Vlade so unique that Magic had to overhaul the entire way he approached the game.

Magic played with many teammates in his career and his effectiveness didn't really change. If more scoring was needed he scored more, if more fast breaks he did that, if more people to pass to he did that... etc. He was a lot like Steve Nash just better.

Magic didn't have to overhaul anything because he could play each role. While being great. So he is the perfect example for this thread.

[Darius]

I don't who qualifies as "great" but Paul George does everything well off ball.

[DMAVS41]

The bolded I don't agree with. Shaq needed shooters and a great wing. Dirk was very good but not great. He had a great run in one year and I'm happ for him. Very nice guy all around. I just don't think he was successful enough throughout his career with any set of players. He could work with any set... yes. But not successful enough.

Curry and Kawhi I don't know yet. Need 2 more years to determine. With MJ... I'm on the fence. He may be a good example after all. I never liked him... it may cloud my judgement.

Did you just start following the NBA?

Dirk led the Mavs to 10 straight seasons of 50 wins or more. In that time, he made the finals twice, won a title and finals mvp, won a regular season MVP, and had a 67 win team as well...which iirc has only been done by like 13 other teams.

The 10 straight 50 win seasons has only been done by Magic's Lakers, Duncan's Spurs, and I think Russell's Celtics.

All of that was done with different coaches and players and systems...from Nellie to Avery to Rick...all while changing out players around him.

Again, you really should educate yourself...

[egokiller]

What impressed me most about Dirk is how he mastered shooting a fade away on one leg while using his knee to create space between himself and the defender. He worked his ass off perfecting that shot and it doesn

[tontoz]

I think OP doesn't need to be educated about Dirk. I think his standards for "star" are unreasonably high. It seems like he is excluding many, if not most, hall of fame players as not being good enough.

[DMAVS41]

I think OP doesn't need to be educated about Dirk. I think his standards for "star" are unreasonably high. It seems like he is excluding many, if not most, hall of fame players as not being good enough.

So we aren't using common meanings of words at this point then.

You might find one out of 100,000 people that know the game saying Dirk wasn't a great player.

And then you have him winning consistently with tons of roster turnover and different coaches / systems...while also not having all-nba caliber help very often out of his 2nd guy either.

Guys like Dirk and Bird could be dropped into basically any basketball situation and help the team without disrupting anything of note.

They fit the definition almost perfectly if we are all agreeing that words mean something.

[tontoz]

Dirk makes it easily for me but OP said he can only come up with maybe 10. I could probably come up with 10 from any random decade since 1980.

[NBAGOAT]

i disagree with the premise. any player prefers some situations to others. yea someone like magic or bird are extremely versatile but for both you would prefer a big who can post up and score in the half court.

Hakeem and duncan dont need as much talent as some other greats based on the 94 and 03 teams but they still prefer to be surrounded by shooters etc. I guess I might throw wilt out there. he can turn trash into a playoff team

[tontoz]

I don't who qualifies as "great" but Paul George does everything well off ball.

He gets underrated because of injuries. He was a legit MVP candidate last season before his shoulder problems wrecked his shot.

[Ainosterhaspie]

I think OP excluding MJ, LeBron and Kobe makes sense whether they actually belong in the convo or not. Just degenerates into being like every other thread involving them. Take them out and it ensures a more interesting conversation.

I'm not sure I really agree with the premise that there is any player you don't have to build around. Centers seem to need quality guards to really succeed. Kareem didn't win really without Oscar and Magic. Shaq had gread guards unlocking him. Maybe Hakeem is the exception here, but I'm not quite convinced. Russell is another guy who maybe fits, but if his team doesn't have scorers, I don't think he's picking up the extra scoring.

Point guards flat out don't work in my opinion. They have to have defenders to back them up and no matter how good they are at setting guys up, they need quality defenders or it won't work. Point guards simply can't defend effectively enough to carry the team on that end and if they don't have a quality defensive front court they're going to fail on that end. See Steve Nash.

Power forwards can lead elite defenses without much else. Garnett and Duncan are examples of this although there is debate about whether Duncan is a power forward or center. They can also be flexible enough offensively to carry an offense, but the biggest difference between Duncan and Garnett is probably the quality of support they had. So that undercuts the idea you can build around them with anyone. And if you can't build around Duncan or Garnett, the power forward position is out.

Small Forwards and Shooting Guards don't have the size to affect defenses like Centers and Power Forwards so you're forced to cover for them defensively when you build a team. Jamed was close to carrying an elite defense in Miami, but the simple difference in how they played once Chris Anderson came aboard points to the value and need to have someone who can alter shots on the back line. Jordan had elite defensive help in Pippen and Grant/Rodman to make up for lack of a real five.

Put it all together and I think there isn't rally a player that qualifies. Every player has a limitation and needs other players to fill in those gaps. Basketball is a team sport and whole the star has enormous impact, there's always a ceiling to that that can only be raised by the right supporting cast.

[knicksman]

lebron james. Even dolan could build around him. You can plug him in with anyone and youre fine. The problem is ceiling tho. You have lesser potential with lebron than mj. Its harder to build around MJ but the ceiling is high. Its like choosing business vs working. Its easier to work than start a business but the potential is much higher with business than working.

[Overdrive]

Let's talk about stars. Not role players. Stars who were successful and you didn't have to build a team for them to be successful. Stars that could work with whoever was there.

I think this list is short. As great as he was, you had to build for Shaq. You definitely have to build for LeBron. Shooters. Kobe? Absolutely. He needed that great big. Barkley? Well, he didn't win. Jordan? Sorry but you had to build for MJ, too.

So who do I have in mind?

Magic
Bird
Duncan
Hakeem

and

Luka seems to be just like that.


Now. I'm sure this list can and will get longer... but who would you guys add? I was thinking of Steve Nash... but he needed fast pace and running teammates plus he didn't win. Never been to a finals. So no. Does Steph Curry belong? How about Kawhi Leonard? Dirk Nowitzki?



You tell me. Rules are clear. Not the best players ever... just successful stars you didn't have to build a team around.

Hakeem and Duncan.

Magic & Bird? Not really. They played with the same core(sans Kareem for a few seasons) all of their respective careers.

I don't think you put Bird/Magic on the '94 Rockets instead of Hakeem and they'd win. Duncan could. That's it.

If we're talking about raising teams to a CF level there are way more guys.

Also think about it. Among all those guys on the DT Barkley was the one who could handle playing with all the stars the best.