Defense vs. Offense

[EnoughSaid]

What kind of player would you rather have and build around?

1) A player that can score in a lot of ways. Someone who you can rely on in the clutch and to always deliver. A great dribbler as well.

OR

2) A defensive player of the year candidate. Someone who hustles, grabs the boards and is always the lock down man. He can defend 4 positions and is the one you put on the other team's star.

[DMAVS41]

offensive player. being able to dominate in the clutch and consistently have an offense run through a player in theses situations is more valuable in my opinion.

[iamgine]

Would kind of depend on their contract. On lower salary, I'd take #2 but on high salary, I'd take #1.

[D-Wade316]

Both. Can't select one without the other.

[TheAesirsFinest]

Offensive player, unless the 2nd player is a DPOY C.

[Indian guy]

Defense can easily be replaced or made-up through team play. There's no such thing for offense. If you don't have top-level offensive talent, you have no hope of being a winning team.

[NJW1247]

So Allen Iverson or Scottie Pippen?



Yeah I'll take the latter.

[DMAVS41]

Defense can easily be replaced or made-up through team play. There's no such thing for offense. If you don't have top-level offensive talent, you have no hope of being a winning team.

Bingo.

[97 bulls]

offensive player. being able to dominate in the clutch and consistently have an offense run through a player in theses situations is more valuable in my opinion.

Funny thing is, your team tried that way for about 7 years. Then they wised up and got some guys that can play some defense and went out and got themmselves a championship. Id think yyoud be on the offensive side.

[DMAVS41]

Funny thing is, your team tried that way for about 7 years. Then they wised up and got some guys that can play some defense and went out and got themmselves a championship. Id think yyoud be on the offensive side.

this is about 1 player...not a team.

good luck trying to win without somebody to take over in the clutch.

goes both ways. both can be great, but if i had to choose...i'd take the guy that is going to be there in those close games.

[Indian guy]

Funny thing is, your team tried that way for about 7 years. Then they wised up and got some guys that can play some defense and went out and got themmselves a championship. Id think yyoud be on the offensive side.

We're talking about INDIVIDUALS here. A top-level offensive player that you can run your offense through is 100x more valuable than a Ben Wallace. Defense is easily replaceable.

[97 bulls]

We're talking about INDIVIDUALS here. A top-level offensive player that you can run your offense through is 100x more valuable than a Ben Wallace. Defense is easily replaceable.

Even then. Are we comparing a bill russell to yao ming? Or like another poster said pippen and iverson? Even though the 2nd example may not be a good one because pippen could score..

[97 bulls]

offensive player. being able to dominate in the clutch and consistently have an offense run through a player in theses situations is more valuable in my opinion.

But think about it dmavs.... there's 4r quarters in every nba game you have to be able to get there. And I've seen more teams lose because thhey couldn't stop anybody than lose because they couldn't score.

And for every clutch offensive play that needed, there someone on the other side that needs to be clutch defensivly ie not fouling etc.

[DMAVS41]

But think about it dmavs.... there's 4r quarters in every nba game you have to be able to get there. And I've seen more teams lose because thhey couldn't stop anybody than lose because they couldn't score.

And for every clutch offensive play that needed, there someone on the other side that needs to be clutch defensivly ie not fouling etc.

close games are inevitable...and along with that clutch ability you are getting an elite offensive first option.

give me the offensive guy all day long. this is basically something like dirk vs pippen or dirk vs rodman.....not even close for me. dirk easily.

just my opinion though.

[97 bulls]

this is about 1 player...not a team.

good luck trying to win without somebody to take over in the clutch.

goes both ways. both can be great, but if i had to choose...i'd take the guy that is going to be there in those close games.

And the more I think about it, based on previous conversations id had with you, even if were talking about a defensive oriented team vs it polar opposite, you'd still more than likely pick the offensive team. Am I right?