RollWithEm

I think this strategy would play right into the 81 team's hands. Would you rather run with Isaiah in charge or John Lucas? With Blackman/Nance/Chambers/Woolridge/Aguirre finishing or with English/Dantley/DJ? I think the only chance the 76ers have to compete is to slow the game down and limit possessions. They would get run out of the gym in a fast paced game with this 81 squad.

__________________
But that's just me.

Najee

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

BadBaronRudigor

Although English is one of the top 3 players on the 76 team, I don't think you want a bang it into the post team starting a weak rebounding PG. You almost have to start May, Shelton, or Kupchak and of the three, Kupchak is the one best suited to the 6th (ok, 7th) man role. Oh, and Lucas was very quick and pretty good defensively, certainly more so than Doc Rivers; he could be posted up but that wasn't Isiah's game.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Najee

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

BadBaronRudigor

If you are in an NBA offense and you have one 25-30 point scorer (Dantley), 2 15-20 point scorers (Parish and DJ), and two 10-15 point scorers (Lucas and May/Shelton) in your starting lineup plus a supersub who is getting 30+ minutes and scoring 20+ points (English) . . . that's 95-125 points without including the contributions from Kupchak, the nonstarter between May/Shelton, Johnny Davis, Buckner, etc. There's no shortage of scoring, there's just not 180 points of scoring trying to be redistributed into a normally paced game like the other squad which is full of primary scorers who may or may not be willing to take or be effective in a reduced role.

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Najee

Adrian Dantley and Alex English are the only players in the Class of '76 capable of putting up 20-plus points per night consistently. Robert Parish and Dennis Johnson are more like 15 to 18 points per night. The rest of the players were average to below-average scorers.

As great as scorers as AD and English were, the Class of '81 has more scorers (Tom Chambers, Mark Aguirre, Larry Nance, Orlando Woolridge, Jay Vincent, Kelly Tripucka) at their position to win in a war of attrition. I also don't like the makeup of the Class of '76 team; arguably its best two players man the same position (small forward) and both have completely divergent styles that make it difficult to play them together. Moreover, the Class of '76 team looks like one more geared to a halfcourt set (which makes English the odd man out, IMO).

And I like to know which John Lucas you keep referring to, because the one I saw doesn't seem to be nearly as good as the one you keep referring to. The Baron Davis comparison was a stretch, to say the least. Lucas was more like a slightly worse version of Andre Miller (a slightly better outside shot but less scoring ability).

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

BadBaronRudigor

Yes, class of 81 has more scorers, but if you try to play the likes of Tom Chambers, Mark Aquirre, Orlando Woolridge, Jay Vincent, and Kelly Tripuka together you have a disaster (Nance is the exception). None of those players play defense, create for others, or are particularly good at anything other than scoring. You end up with a selfish bunch of isolation players . . . not helped by the fact that your PG (who is a better PG than Lucas but who has a big ego and needs to be the man on his team) is ALSO a primary scorer, as is your SG . . . the only one who isn't is either Buck Williams or Larry Nance . . . I don't care how many scorers you have, you only get so many shots and with weak defense, below average passing, and average rebounding . . . you aren't going to get all the shots that all your one on one players need. So, quit saying you are going to win because you have scorers because there is more than enough scoring on both sides and tell me whether you can win the battle defensively, on the boards, in team player, anywhere OTHER than scoring (and other than that you don't think John Lucas can play PG which is a legitimate argument, albeit one I don't agree with).

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Najee

I didn't say John Lucas couldn't play point guard -- I'm wondering where in the world are you getting the Baron Davis comparison (namely, a dominant scoring point guard who would be the top or second option on most teams), because that certainly doesn't sound like the John Lucas I saw in the NBA. The one I saw was more like a slightly worse version of Andre Miller (namely, a complementary No. 3 man on a good team).

And it's not a slight to say that Lucas would fall to one of the top five point guards in NBA history -- after all, Lucas had problems guarding Isiah Thomas in real life (their careers overlapped for some nine seasons). I feel you're overrating Lucas.

My problem with the Class of '76 team is as much as I like Adrian Dantley, Robert Parish, Dennis Johnson and Alex English there is a rather steep drop-off in talent after them. In any basketball scenario (real or hypothetical), talent does become the prevailing issue.

Arguably the best two players (Dantley and English) man the same position and because they only can play small forward you likely won't have them on the floor at the same time. AD and English aren't exactly great defenders (while Larry Nance is), so they will be giving up points as well. Moreover, Nance, Tom Chambers and Orlando Woolridge can man the other forward position meaning any combination of them plus Mark Aguirre, Jay Vincent and Kelly Tripucka can be on the floor at the same time.

I also feel that the Class of '81 team would be the absolute worst matchup for that group, because the team actually can negate their strengths (namely, production at small forward) while overwhelming them with overall talent. If the Class of '76 was playing, say, the Class of '86 I would take the AD/English/Parish/DJ team. The Class of '76 is not necessarily the better defensive or rebounding team and it will have to rely on the halfcourt set to have any chance vs. the Class of '81.

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.

BadBaronRudigor

I have no problem with using Andre Miller instead of Baron Davis; it was more stylistic, Lucas had a similar look to Baron visually in the way he moved when he was playing and the type of shooting whereas Andre Miller never reminded me of Lucas at all.

Oh, and Alex English played the 4, 3, and 2 in Denver depending on matchups and the machinations of Doug Moe's crazed mind and was the best defensive player in that Issel, Vandeweghe, English front line, drawing the better offensive forward as his assingnment. I have him off the bench because I don't think any lineup featuring Dantley, Parish, and DJ needs scoring and BECAUSE of his versatility which lets him come in for anyone but Parish (and for Parish if Shelton beats out May for the starting PF slot).

__________________
If you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk

Najee

__________________
"(Mike) Tyson got a bad rap. He's NEVER messed with anyone outside of boxing. ... What normal person has Tyson blown up on?"

TRAGEDY, who made arguably the most inexplicable quote of 2008.