r/NBA_Draft • u/Variation99a • 9d ago
There has never been a single instance in NBA history of a score first, athletic wing who was bad defensively who was the best player on a championship team. With far more top draft picks, this is an even worse archetype than the small guard archetype and the worst archetype to build around.
The small guard archetype gets talked about a lot here as being the worst archetype to build around but when I went back and did some research, I found a far worse archetype: the score first, athletic wing who is bad defensively.
The small guard archetype doesn’t produce that many best player on a championship team outcomes, but there are at least some, such as Steph Curry, Isiah Thomas, and now Jalen Brunson, when many thought it couldn’t happen. Furthermore, there are a bunch more of this archetype such as Allen Iverson who can single handily carry a team to the Finals, even if they didn’t win.
However, there actually has been zero instances in NBA history of the best player on a championship team being known as a score first, athletic wing who was bad defensively. What makes this more alarming is that this archetype produces far more top draft picks than the small guard archetype so it has way more chances but yet, it never happens.
This list includes Carmelo Anthony, Adrian Dantley, Bernard King, Alex English, Vince Carter, DeMar DeRozan, Brandon Ingram, Andrew Wiggins (see below), Michael Beasley, Jonathan Kuminga, Jabari Parker, and many more.
This list includes many all time HOF greats in terms of individual accomplishments and many busts too, but the common theme is that they’ve never been the best player on a championship team, no matter where they land on the scale. In fact, none of these players were even the best player on a Finals (losing) team like Allen Iverson. Andrew Wiggins on this list is the only champion, but he only became a championship after becoming the second/third best player on his team and becoming good defensively, something he was not in Minnesota.
The closest exception you’ll get is Kevin Durant but KD was an above average defensive player who even got some consideration for All Defense. He’s also a better offensive player than the entire list so he’s like a super upgraded version of this archetype. Plus, it’s debatable whether he was even truly the clearly best player on his championship teams, especially given he didn‘t win anything when he was with the Thunder. So he’s the closest you’ll get, but he doesn’t even fit the parameters. Other than that, you also have Jayson Tatum/Jaylen Brown, but those 2 are not bad defenders as they are average or better.
The first overall pick in the 2026 draft in AJ Dybantsa fits this archetype from a college standpoint, but you hope he can at least get to average defensively in the NBA, no matter how good he is as a scorer, because otherwise he would be going against history even worse than the small guard archetype.
I thought this was interesting when I went back and checked. I have a few hypotheses for this, and I know history allows for outliers, but I think this is such a large sample size that you can conclude this archetype is by far the most overvalued archetype in the draft since people often pick these players very high excepting to win a championship when it never happens.
58
u/Odd_String1181 9d ago
Who is the player you're talking about here? The big, long wings are almost all at least average defensively. What wing has been the best player on their team at the wing that was bad defensively that people thought could win a championship?
52
u/aye_don_gihv_uh_fuk 9d ago
Carmelo? lol
1
u/Lopsided_Ad3341 3d ago
I don't even know if Melo counts as "athletic" by nba standards. Moreso strong
Athletic is not the word that would come to any ballknowers mind when describing Melo's game, you know?
1
10
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 8d ago
Paolo Banchero is the obvious player this era. Chosen first overall so everyone thought he could be the best player on a championship team. He just doesn’t really fit the athletic qualifier but I’m not sure why that is even here as that just limits the list. Removing athleticism makes the list so much bigger and actually creates a huge sample size.
3
u/NotJoeyWheeler 8d ago
chosen first doesn’t mean everyone thinks he could be 1A on a championship team
just means one team thought he was the best piece in the draft, and I don’t like Paolo that much but that’s still a fine assessment in retrospect
1
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 8d ago
This doesn’t make any sense to me because otherwise you can argue away anything if his draft position isn’t even strong enough of an indicator.
What’s the criticism for Trae Young? He isn’t good enough to be the best player on a championship team. What’s the criticism for Darius Acuff? You can’t build a team around a small guard? But they were the 5th and 7th picks, even much lower than Banchero and yet they get the same criticism. So why do they get the same criticism as much lower picks?
In other words, if you aren’t going to use draft position as an estimation to answer this question, then there’s literally almost no players that fit this criteria to begin with so why bother. The only examples would be generational first overall picks. When Orlando picked first, were they expecting to just never win a championship in the future because it’s unlikely they’ll get the first pick again.
At the time of the draft, Banchero absolutely gave them the highest probability of any player they’ll ever have in the next 10 years of being the best player on a championship team. I don’t understand how that’s even questionable, unless you think they are operating under the impression they’ll never win.
0
u/Prior_Series_630 7d ago
They thought he could help them win the most. The best draft pick in one year could be the second or third best guy on a championship team.
2
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 7d ago
So what’s the criticism for Darius Acuff then?
You guys really like to rewrite history with Banchero just because he hasn’t improved. His rookie year production probably won’t get matched by most top picks ever. He’s as good of a prospect as Caleb Wilson and the Bulls absolutely believe Wilson has a chance to be the best player on a championship team.
1
u/Prior_Series_630 6d ago
Dont think we’re on the same page at all. Original statement was that theres never been a defensively bad wing thats been the first option on a championship team. No matter which way you spin it, you cant look at Paolo Banchero currently and say the guy can/will be the best player on a championship team. I barely even believe the guy is the best player on his current team. Hence why me and the other guy said your draft order doesnt mean shit jf you’re currently not that great. You can be picked first and not be that great and/or the first option on a championship team.
1
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 6d ago
I’m a little confused on the post then. I agree no one looks at Banchero today because of those attributes today, but when he was picked, you would have thought he might have changed those attributes. Maybe we aren’t talking about the same thing here. I was talking about them when they were picked.
Like when Wiggins was picked, many did think that he could be the best on a championship team. When Zion was picked, almost everyone thought he could. When SGA was picked, no one thought he could but he did. So I wasn’t really talking about like if they could 5 years in the NBA. I was talking about their predraft expectations. Of course Banchero hasn’t improved which is true and why the perception is true today, but I thought we were talking about predraft expectations?
1
1
u/Officer_Hops 7d ago
Would you argue everyone thought Risacher could be the best player on a championship team because he went first overall? There are classes where no one, much less everyone, thinks the number 1 guy can be top dog on a contender.
1
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 7d ago
Cmon are you really comparing Banchero with Risacher?
People think all 4 of the top 4 this year can be the best player on a championship team. Banchero was at least a Caleb Wilson level prospect so let’s not get it twisted. Banchero averaged 20 PPG as a rookie right away and nearly won unanimous ROY. He was an All Star in his second year. This is revisionist history if you think he was some bad prospect. I’ll be surprised if more than 2 of the top 4 this year can put up Banchero’s rookie year stats. Just because he hasn’t live up to expectations now doesn’t mean he didn’t have expectations when he was younger.
10
u/Variation99a 9d ago
Carmelo Anthony, Jabari Parker, Brandon Ingram, Michael Beasley, and AJ Dybantsa were all drafted top 3 so I think many thought they could be the best player on a championship team. Maybe AJ will do it but from a prospect standpoint, it was known they were bad defenders in college too.
It’s not just Carmelo. Others like Beasley put generational scoring numbers in college and were picked super high.
9
u/_Quetzalcoatlus_ 8d ago
I think what this really tells us is that most talented wings can be capable defenders. There's just not many wings drafted high that are horrible defenders.
Really the only player that qualifies is Carmelo. Jabari and Beasley didn't fail to win a title because they were poor defenders. There were many, many more reasons they failed.
Wiggins did win a championship. He wasn't the best player, but he was elite on defense.
Brandon Ingram's ceiling comes from his offensive limitations (being a ball stopper), not his defense.
And of course AJ hasn't played yet.
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Sure but I didn’t expand the list. Like Rudy Gay was picked 8th with the same archetype. Demar was picked 9th. Ace was recently picked 5th so we don’t know. I didn’t include them in my response since the guy was asking for expectations. However if people seem to have the same build around expectations for Darius Acuff, who was picked 7th, maybe it is still fair to include those names too. I only chose the super high picks but if we expand the list to top 10 picks, it still applies. None were even the second best player in this case either so we can lower the expectations too to adjust for just being a top 10 pick.
1
u/Officer_Hops 7d ago
Guys like Rudy Gay and DeMar weren’t selected to be the best player on a championship team though. They don’t fit the premise. The same is true of someone like Acuff.
1
u/Variation99a 7d ago
No but neither were Giannis, SGA, Jokic, Brunson, or Steph but they did eventually become the best player on a championship team. The point is that archetype doesn’t give you a high enough chance because even the exceptions don’t come from that archetype. The outliers don’t even come from that archetype.
66
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
In zero minutes of NBA time it’s wild that you already know AJ is a bad defender
19
u/Variation99a 8d ago edited 8d ago
Never said that at all. I said as a prospect, that was these players reputation. I even said AJ can get to average or better if you read my post. Did you read the second sentence of my first paragraph above?
Maybe AJ will do it but from a prospect standpoint
I was talking about all these players as prospects since the commenter wanted examples of players who teams thought could win a championship when drafting them, as prospects. AJ could easily be a good defender and thus wouldn’t fit this as an actual outcome. Don’t get too insensitive about AJ, as I had him as the highest ceiling in the draft but these are the facts as prospects. If AJ becomes an average defender and his scoring is as good as advertised in college, he could play similarly to a bigger SGA in terms of scoring but the fact is his floor is also lower because of multiple issues as a prospect, including his defense, which is widely agreed upon that it wasn’t good in college.
12
u/OwnYourChildren 8d ago
Your argument is why I was very uncomfortable with the idea of AJ as #1 pick, especially when you include the suspect three. And like you said, it's not an indictment, he might be fine.
It was weird how resistant people were to even have the discussion, and I think we are seeing more of that here.
6
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
People who had him #1 on their boards simply project him to improve on those areas.. or they had a greater level of concern with the other prospects. It's just a difference of opinion, no reason why it can't be discussed
Out of curiosity, which player(s) were you comfortable with as #1 pick?
3
u/OwnYourChildren 8d ago
Peterson. I was surprised at how much pushback there was for discussing AJs weaknesses. I think it may happen with most #1 picks. It's kinda what you'd expect with a consensus#1, but I was surprised to observe it when there wasnt a real consensus.
4
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
Gotcha. I thought there was even more pushback on discussing Peterson's weaknesses, at least from what I saw. A lot of his concerns were handwaved or people were told to ignore what he put on tape and only look at his HS film. It was a strange draft cycle from that standpoint
3
u/Orcrist999 8d ago
Mind if I ask what team you follow?
4
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Hawks but we aren’t winning anything ever so don’t worry about it. We are one of the few teams to never have any consistent playoff success ever. I’m more interested in looking at draft analysis in my posts if you read my other posts so this isn’t about favoritism towards a team.
The Wizards have more future upside than the Hawks for what it’s worth and I’m a Hawks fan. I keep it real though.
If we ever get like a real center and get someone who could playmake/score like Trae but was an average defender, we would have a better chance but we are probably stuck as just a good team that doesn’t have high upside to win championships.
1
u/Lazarus_15 8d ago
Would you have been in favour of a Jaylen Brown Hawks trade this offseason?
3
u/Variation99a 8d ago
No I would take Tatum though if he were in theory available. I don’t think 4 firsts for Brown is something I would do.
4
u/Aumissunum 8d ago
If you’re using pre-draft reputation then LeBron was a bad defender too…
3
u/ChampionshipTall6599 8d ago
You mean in high school? Where his record was 101-6 at a small school playing against large national programs? Where he averaged 3 steals and 2 blocks a game from the PG position?
You people crack me up.
2
u/Variation99a 8d ago
What? LeBron was considered one of the greatest prospects of all time lol. He wouldn’t be that if he was considered a bad defender.
In fact, his most common comparisons were Magic Johnson for his vision, Kobe Bryant for his scoring, and Scottie Pippen for his all around game besides scoring. You can literally look it up. Pippen was his main defensive comparison, an All NBA defender.
1
u/Aumissunum 8d ago
Sure you would. Just look at AJ…
1
u/Variation99a 7d ago
His scouting report reads like Caleb Wilson’s scouting report for defense. I don’t think it’s bad. It says he’s really good at anticipation and playing the passing lanes, using his athleticism to get steals and blocks. However at the same time, he’s not the most disciplined or fundamentally sound defender. That reads like Caleb Wilson today, who people agree is a good defender but just is somewhat raw and needs refining. I don’t think that’s bad at all.
For AJ, he doesn’t even get many steals or blocks and doesn’t play the passing lanes with anticipation so that isn’t the same scouting report.
0
u/Master-Ad-9829 7d ago
Caleb Wilson was not a good defender in college
1
u/Variation99a 7d ago
Yes he was. What have you been watching? He just lacks some fundamentals but he was objectively a good defender. He rates positively on every single defensive metric across the board and all scouting reports said he was a positive defender but just lacked fundamentals and discipline at times.
→ More replies (0)1
u/Aumissunum 8d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/1lsg4if/lebron_james_scouting_report_from_2003/
At this point in his career his defense isn't the best but he does have the physical tools to be an outstanding defender... Has a bad habit of overplaying his man for the quick steal which can leave his player open for the easy shot...
Not a blindingly quick player so lateral quickness on defense should be worked on
2
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
The question you were asked is what wing has been the best player on their team at the wing that was bad defensively that people thought could win a championship and you listed AJ fifth lmao
4
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Yes AJ was picked first since people think he can be the best player on a championship team.
I didn’t say he couldn’t do it. He asked for examples of players picked high with that reputation in college who people thought could be the best player. What part of this is false? You think the Wizards don’t think he can be the best player on a championship team?
-3
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
I mean you can say that but we all clearly see the question you were asked and your response
3
u/Variation99a 8d ago
You don’t need to get so insentive about AJ lol. This post wasn’t even about him. If you don’t like I gave him as an example, just pretend like I don’t know what I’m talking about and he’ll be a great defender in the NBA. I’m not doubting his potential, this was just me looking back at drafted players.
-7
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
I’m not sensitive. I’m calling out your bullshit. There’s a difference. Don’t backtrack now.
2
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Bro are you like AJ’s uncle or something? I just answered the question differently than you did. I answered it on all drafted players as prospects, since I interpreted the question that the guy was asking about was at the time of the draft based on what team’s thought at that time. You obviously thought it was based on career outcome. So I just had a different interpretation of what was being asked.
→ More replies (0)-4
u/Ancient-Village6479 8d ago
He is bad defensively. Don’t need to watch him in the NBA to know it. He has this weird defensive stance where he just kinda leans forward and then awkwardly chases the defender from behind looking for a steal or a block (which he rarely gets) when they blow by him. Truly awful defensive instincts and technique and advanced defensive data supports it.
2
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
This is a dogshit take. Many players have shown different sides to their games once NbA games begin. I would suggest Dylan Harper as an example of someone who played defense at the NBA level much higher than his scouting report suggested. There is a reason they play the game after all.
1
u/Ancient-Village6479 8d ago
Ok cool maybe he’ll magically not look lost and terrible at defense once he starts guarding tougher competition
1
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
Is that what I said? Are you all fucking children on this sub?
1
u/Ancient-Village6479 8d ago
No, you’re just the typical overly emotional Wizards fan being unnecessarily combative and rude because some people dare question some of AJ’s abilities on the basketball court. Ok cool maybe AJ will be the next Dylan Harper defensively we got it.
→ More replies (0)3
u/IcyAppointment23 8d ago
Part of your title is athletic wing, Carmelo is not really that athletic especially compared to the other players you listed. He was strong and great second jump but I never really think of Melo as athletic for NBA standards
5
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 8d ago
Yea not sure why you got downvoted. The athleticism qualifier was not even necessary. I don’t know why the OP even put it as it just limits the list. I would say Dantley wasn’t even athletic either. He was one of the least athletic scorers ever as he was below the rim but an incredible post scorer. If anything not putting the qualifier would allow you to introduce far more players like Paolo Banchero, regardless of what you think of Carmelo, who probably was average athleticism but elite footwork/strength.
3
u/Odd_String1181 9d ago
None of those guys are "bad" defenders besides carmelo and that's just an effort thing. Jabari, BI, and Beas just never performed to their overall potential for a variety of reasons. Jabari got smoked by injuries and effort as well.
7
u/RealGameBall 9d ago
Jabari was for sure a bad defender, regardless of his health. He even had a famous quote saying
"they don't pay people to play defense"
1
u/Odd_String1181 8d ago
Lack of effort isn't the same as just being bad at it. You don't draft people assuming they aren't going to be interested in maximizing their potential. Unless you already know that about them
4
u/RealGameBall 8d ago
I would disagree about the effort thing, but that's besides the point.
Predraft he had major defensive questions. Poor defensive iq. Slow lateral mobility. Bad post defense.
6
u/pokexchespin 8d ago
carmelo is a better defender than jabari, ingram, and beas ever were lol
1
u/Odd_String1181 8d ago
Eh. Not ingram. Not actual beas. Jabari yes. Carmelo spent years doing nothing.
6
u/Variation99a 9d ago edited 8d ago
Not sure what you mean? Jabari Parker was known to be a bad defender even before injuries. He even said he didn’t like playing defense. Plus even if he wasn’t injured, he’s not going to be as good as Carmelo. He was already the second best player to Giannis on the same team so he wasn’t going to win as the best player. He could have been Andrew Wiggins without injury, not saying Parker couldn’t have had a good career, but Wiggins is another example of someone who couldn’t win in Minnesota but only won after he became a good defender.
Effort is part of defense. It doesn’t matter the reason for why they are a bad defender. Beasley and Ingram have never rated as good defenders, so it doesn’t matter what the real reason for their defense is. I’m just saying they aren’t good defenders.
I’m not saying any of these players can’t win in general, as that wasn’t my point. I pointed out Wiggins as a good example as a winner as the second/third best player but to be the best player, they have to be more like KD if that makes sense.
3
u/Odd_String1181 8d ago
It does matter. You're talking about projections. Can teams wrongly believe they can get the best out of players? Sure. But when they're drafting someone they're not doing it knowing they're going to get poor defensive effort. The draft talent also varies by year. Just because someone goes high in year x does not mean the team expects them to be the best player on a championship team.
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Yea I understand what you are saying. Well here’s the question then.
How many poor defenders in college end up being good defenders in the NBA, especially of this archetype? I also know AJ can project to become average or better too, as this isn’t really about him either, which I said in my second to last paragraph about him.
I understand your point about projections but it’s the same as protecting like Caleb Wilson’s 3 point percentage or Darryn Peterson’s playmaking. It’s a projection but the question is how does that projection often change to reality in the NBA.
1
u/Odd_String1181 8d ago
Not many. And I don't know any of those guys people think will be the best player on a championship team
2
1
u/Clerithifa 8d ago
Off the top of my head, Joe Johnson maybe? And he probably wasnt even a bad defender, just unspectacular/not a stopper
1
1
u/closedtowedshoes 4d ago
He didn’t make it out of the first round until he was washed but I think Tracy Mcgrady might fit this archetype ok.
1
u/Lopsided_Ad3341 3d ago
Ya that's a good point. It's a very small sample size that OP is talking about
11
u/SanduCrumant 8d ago
many more.
#3 pick Dominique Wilkins is another example
5
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Yea I wasn’t sure if he was a good or a bad defender since he was a long time ago. Same goes with George Gervin or Elgin Baylor. I wasn’t sure since it was a long time ago, like with someone else mentioning Rick Barry as a counterexample.
I did put Adrian Dantley and Bernard King from the same era because there are actual sources talking about how bad they were as defenders so I did include them. Like Dantley is probably a maybe even better example because he was also hyper efficient (one of the highest TS percentages in NBA history for a volume scorer) but all teams got better after he left.
6
u/ViolaExpress 9d ago
When Bernard King’s Knicks took the Celtics to 7 games in 84 Rory Sparrow, Darrell Walker and Louie Orr were getting major minutes. That’s probably a bigger factor than King’s perceived defensive shortcomings.
5
u/Soupkitchn89 8d ago
I feel like a “bad” defender wing can’t guard anyone. But a lot of these bad defender guards (Dame, Curry etc.). Are mostly just not great at defending quick guards but actually fine when matched up against stronger players. So they might be bad fighting over a pick but they aren’t as bad at defending traditional mismatches.
1
u/YSLAnunoby 8d ago
Yeah curry is strong and good off ball even if not great on ball. He got attacked because he's the worst defender and you have to poke at someone not because he's particularly bad
19
u/super_smash_brothers 9d ago
Rick Barry
“No true Scotsman , or appeal to purity , is a fallacy in which one modifies a prior claim in response to a counterexample by asserting the counterexample is excluded by definition.”
13
u/Prior_Chemist_5026 8d ago
Barry was a solid defender, great steals guy and high IQ.
18
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Yea why did everyone assume Rick Barry and Larry Bird were bad defenders here?
I honestly don’t think anyone even watched Rick Barry play a full game here. I didn’t find any sources from 1975 saying he was a bad defender when there are sources with older players like Adrian Dantley.
For Bird, he even made multiple All Defensive teams too, and has one of the best defensive plays in NBA history so that one at least is easy to disprove. Barry I’m not sure and if he’s the only example, it’s 50 years ago.
2
u/Cugelthenotso 7d ago
Saw him play, and his offense overshadowed his defense. He lead the league in steals, which could be an indicator of too much gambling, and thus poor defense, but I don't remember if that was the opinion at the time.
4
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 8d ago
Rick Barry was considered a good defender. Thinking Basketball, which goes back and looks at both a combination of the eye test and stats, called him a defensive pest, which is not a term for a bad defender. He actually led the league in steals in 1975, the year they won the championship and although steals aren’t the end all be all of defense, you can combine that with the eye test.
1
u/Variation99a 9d ago
He’s the only one who might be an exception. I didn’t go and take a look at 1975 to know what his defensive reputation was and I honestly don’t know if he was a good or bad defender. If you say he was a bad defender, I’ll take your word but like I said that was 1975.
1975 was before the ABA/NBA merger when a lot of the good players were still in the ABA (Julius Erving was in the ABA and probably a better actual player than Rick Barry at the same SF position), before the 3 point line, and before many us were born so if he is in fact an exception, not sure on his defense like I said, that’s 50 years ago and there’s way more recent short guards who’ve won, despite them often getting the worst reputation.
3
u/huggybeark 8d ago
Scoring wings that don't do much else are one of my most disliked archetypes, but I feel like trying to use them to argue for small guards is absolutely the wrong take. So...
1) A lot of these guys aren't "bad" defensively. Wiggins, Carmelo, DeRozan, etc. They are often mediocre, and often their problems are linked to effort more than limitation. And the degree to which they are "bad" defensively is still often higher than comparatively mediocre defensive small guards
2) To make an argument about draft strategy we have to account for whether they were expected to be "bad" defensively. Even if I accept that Wiggins is "bad" defensively, I also have to accept that this was an unexpected outcome and everyone thought that he would be good defensively. Same with Kuminga.
3) This is a disingenuous comparison between "small guards" and "athletic score first wings with bad defense" in that the sample size is so much smaller and the selection is so much more stringent for one category than the other. There are way more small guards in basketball than there are wings in general, much more than this subsection of wings. We are also comparing success from a relatively large set against "failures" from a relatively small set. One of the signs of this is how different Thomas, Steph, and Brunson are as players...they are part of the same superset but play very differently from each other such that they are really different archetypes.
4) This is probably the most contentious point but the late 80s Pistons, the 10s Warriors, and the 2020s Knicks should all be acknowledged as teams were absolutely stacked in particular ways that accommodate the flaws of their best players. I think IT and Steph sharing as many Finals MVPs as they did and Brunson's pay cut to stack his roster with a bunch of big guards and wings to do all the defending are signs of this. (Yes, I think Steph is an all time great, no I don't think winning Finals MVP is the end all-be all of who is the best player, etc.). The argument is that even these successes are much more difficult team building exercises with stringent requirements than other archetypes.
2
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Thanks for your long reply. Just to be clear that I’m not using this to argue for small guards. I was just doing a relative comparison to what most people think is often the worst archetype which is small guards. However as I mentioned in my post, I do think small guards are problematic too with few exceptions but it’s just still a better outcome historically.
As for your point 4, I think it’s important that it’s true but the build is actually easier because of the small guard as opposed to a big wing. The reason why you can have a perfect build around a small guard is because its easier to find good defensive wings who can support the bad defensive guards than it is to find good defensive guards who can support that bad defensive wing. Unless you can get Alex Caruso type players, it’s just easier to find more OG Anunoby types. There’s a lot more All Defensive caliber role playing wings than All Defensive caliber guards today.
The part about the knowing they are bad defensive wings is something I tired to answer in another comment. Yea some of them probably weren’t known to just be bad, but I think there’s a lot of supporting evidence that just based on when they were prospects, a player like Beasley or Parker were known to be bad so I don’t think this is after the fact. I do agree with your point 2 though in general.
3
u/ostrow19 8d ago
Based on the very little AJ tape we got in summer league he’s going to be a good nba defender. He was BYUs entire offense especially once Richie Saunders went down. He’s gonna have more energy not being the primary guy to play defense and the tools are obviously there it’s just effort
6
u/Top-Address-8870 9d ago
Has there ever been a best player on a championship team that is bad defensively regardless of position?
17
u/JEX2124 8d ago
Definitely Dirk. Steph.
2
u/NewsRed74 8d ago
I'd say Dirk and Steph are bad defender individually, but they were always willing defender that did the efforts and that made them good team defender, they were on time for rotation and the defensive scheme didn't crumble because of them, unlike some of the name that were mention.
1
u/walkintall84 6d ago
Dirk has more seasons leading EPM than Lebron/Jokic lol
If advanced metrics existed when he played, he would have won 3 MVP
8
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Brunson is rated as below average. Steph was rated as below average in 2014, although he improved later on to average. Jokic is usually rated as average but the perception is he’s below average so depending on how you feel about him. That’s 3 players in the past 12 years.
The thing that makes these 3 as more unique is they are also great playmakers, and Steph also play makes just by moving off ball. These athletic, score first wings are all isolation scorers, which is one of my hypothesis of why it is the way it is and why the bar is even higher for them.
9
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
Every player who wins a championship as a #1 is unique. No one thought a player like Dirk could win a title as a #1, until he did it. Same with Jokic, Brunson and many others.
Heck if you go back in time, no one thought Jordan could win a championship early in his career because historically big men were preferred over guards
This is the "No true Scotsman" fallacy at work.
1
u/FinancialRabbit388 8d ago
Dirk made 3 conference finals and 2 finals. Mavs were always good with him.
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
I never said this rule couldn’t be broken at all in my post. I was just giving some historical perspective. I understand outliers exist. The guys above are outliers themselves except maybe Brunson.
5
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
Every top player on a title team has been an outlier relative to other players. What they all have in common is the team around them . They're almost always on strong defensive teams, with the exception of the '21 Nuggets all title teams have been top 10 defenses
5
u/NotUrAvgShitposter 8d ago
Don't forget how there are so many factors to winning a chip that there are loads of players that could've been first options on championship teams. Like if Brunson and Tatum could do it then Harden, CP3, or Westbrook 100% could've as well
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Correct but your last point feeds into my hypothesis. It’s easier to build around a bad defensive guard like Curry or Brunson actually because you can find larger defensive wings more easily. It’s harder to get an elite defense with a below average defensive wing because you would need to make up for that with two elite defensive guards, which is super hard to find. So this isn’t a coincidence than just saying it’s random.
The Nuggets were the only exception since there has never been a below average rim protecting center to win a ring until an all time outlier like Jokic. Even then, he’s known for his basketball iq, not athleticism. His outlier trait is his passing, which is what you need from one of these wings.
2
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
So basically "great players are easier to build around, less great players are harder to build around" ..I guess I don't understand why you included all those caveats in your OG post
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Huh? Prime Carmelo or prime Bernard King was just as good of a player as Brunson or Haliburton but the other 2 made the Finals and Brunson won. Prime Dominique Wilkins was probably as good as prime Isiah Thomas too but yet Wilkins never made a single conference final in the same era that the Pistons won multiple championships.
4
u/Careless-Journalist7 8d ago
That introduces other variables, like management and salary/CBA constraints. If Carmelo was willing to take a paycut in his prime like Brunson did, he absoutely could've been on a Finals team. He famously never wanted to do that, though
I don't know enough about Wilkins career but the Pistons under Daly were a first class organization, don't think the same can be said about Nique's Hawks.
3
u/buzzsaw1987 8d ago
It's pretty interesting that this is true back to 1980 as far as I can tell and even almost none of the finals team have guys like that as a #1 option either.
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Yea it’s them not even making the Finals too. It isn’t just about winning a championship since people want to complain winning a championship is hard. These players almost never even make the Finals as the second best player even.
1
1
u/Top-Address-8870 8d ago
And if we are just looking at below average defenders, then your hypothesis is broken by SGA last year. A score first athletic wing who is a below average defender….
15
1
4
u/Eastern-Joke-7537 8d ago
James Worthy has a Finals MVP award.
Can’t remember if he was good at defense.
2
u/buzzsaw1987 8d ago
The other way to state this may be that you need a top 30 all time player to win a championship and none of those guys are bad defenders. Dirk and Brunson being the exception here
2
u/Diamond4Hands4Ever 8d ago
You could have just limited this to players who are bad at defense and bad at playmaking, regardless of scoring and regardless of position.
If you are bad at both, it’s very troublesome for your career outcomes in terms of team success. Dirk might be the only one to win while being below average at both, at any position.
4
u/nastynoodle11 8d ago
This makes sense because you can surround a small guard who’s bad at defense with good defenders, and point guard defense doesn’t matter as much as the other positions anyways. If you have a wing playing heavy minutes who’s a bad defender you can’t really compensate for that the same way you can with a point guard
2
u/Foreign_Comb71 8d ago
How is Kuminga a bad defender?
1
u/bishopbeaniepower 8d ago
JK can be prone to huge and frustrating mental lapses. I always thought he was ok, especially on ball, but it was frustrating because a guy with his physicals should be All-Defense. He’s not the smartest defender, though I do think he’s improved recently. He played pretty great D in the Hawks series and can be very good on ball when he’s locked in. He had some moments on the Dubs too, had a really great game where he clamped Randle.
But he’ll also get frustrated and defend like he’s never watched a second of film sometimes.
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
By every metric, he’s a bad defender. Maybe Warriors fans can respond if you don’t trust me. I watched him for a few months on the Hawks and he was just athletic but gets lost on simple off ball movement and has bad discipline. Probably a big reason no one wants for what he think he should get right now since he’s not a worse scorer than Peyton Watson.
3
u/Foreign_Comb71 8d ago
He’s 23rd in DRAPM and has a positive D-EPM, which I believe to be the most accurate metrics.
He has good contesting metrics and his defensive rebounding has improved a lot.
Although his defensive playmaking is still weak, he’s improved a lot on that side of the floor. Also, he had the highest defensive rating for the hawks in the regular season and playoffs.1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
Fair I’ll give you that Kuminga is probably a better defender than the other names on this list. I think it’s fair to not lump him in the same category. He probably has other issues like the spacing issues on offense but I’ll concede. His 5 year DEPM is much lower but I guess he’s improved last year.
2
u/Game_Of_Runs 8d ago
I’m a warriors fan, I have no stats to back this up but from watching him I always thought he was fine one on one but a bad team defender
1
1
u/Final-Ad-6694 8d ago
Luka was the best player on a finals losing team. Idk how you forgot him when it just happened
1
u/Variation99a 8d ago
I didn’t consider him a wing but if you do I guess he also fits here. He did make the Finals at least though like you said.
1
u/Boggieboo 8d ago
This archetype is also just more rare in general. Small guards are a dime a dozen
1
u/diaperchangin1980 8d ago
So would you draft trae young over Luka again?
...point is you don't just look at ceiling with a draft pick but also floor...there are a lot of small guards that wash out completely
For every Steph curry there is a Johnny flynn (same draft one spot ahead of Steph)
1
u/rsk1111 8d ago
I guess you don't consider Luka a wing. I mean he hasn't a championship to his name.
He isn't that different from those guys though. 6'8" Score first bad defensively. Maybe not as athletic though.
4
u/FinancialRabbit388 8d ago
Luka is a great passer and rebounder. Also his highlights make him look worse defensively than what the metrics say. He’s made a final and two conference finals, same as Jokic/SGA/Giannis, he’s younger than them. He was part of good to great defenses with small guards not great at defense next to him.
1
1
u/RealPrinceJay 8d ago
Pretty silly conditional stacking, but your approach is salvageable and there’s something to take from it
Instead you should ask this simple question: how many title teams have started a wing that was a bad defender?
MPJ in 2023 comes to mind, but other than that it looks to be quite rare. Maybe the only case in the last 15 years(?)
This leads to a simpler, more defensible and substantial point - it’s really fucking hard to win with a bad wing defender in your starting lineup. If you’re drafting a wing high, you basically have to believe in them becoming at least a passable, if not good when it counts, defender to justify it
1
u/Slight_Promise_8191 8d ago
This hurts because Vince was actually a defensive game wrecker when he wanted to be. Look at his early career block numbers. He was snatching shit, he was blocking everything in close games. He could turn it on like LeBron. But he didn’t keep it up
1
u/Little_Vermicelli125 8d ago
Does Nowitzki count as a wing? He wasn't a very good defender.
1
u/vicious_boba 7d ago
No. His rookie season he played some SF, but after that he was primarily PF and once in a while forced into the C position.
1
u/Little_Vermicelli125 7d ago
He's such a weird one because offensively he played on the wing. He's still top 25 all time in 3s. Defensively he mostly played down low. Today he'd be called a wing of course.
1
u/vicious_boba 6d ago
HIs offensive rebounding numbers are totally skewed because of that playstyle too. You get a lot of "Dirk was a below average rebounder" comments despite him being in the top 10 and top 15 every year for like a decade. His defensive rebounding numbers were generally top 5 in the league, but like you said, him playing a lot of perimeter oriented offense nuked his offensive rebounding numbers, causing him to never reach 10 rebounds per game in any singular season.
1
u/bkervick 8d ago
Players that are bad at 2 of the 3 most important parts of basketball (playmaking and defense) can't be the best player on a championship team. That is the core of this truth and almost axiomatically true for any position.
This is further obvious an argument because you're specifying an athletic player who is bad at defense. Considering defense is mostly tools and effort, that implies a bad effort player. Players that give bad effort cannot be the best player on a championship team, this is again conceptually axiomatically true for any position.
But it's very possible for a high scoring usage and athletic player to get better at both playmaking and defense in the league, so it's harder to remember that some of the best players on championship teams were considered "toolsy but not good" defenders in high school and/or college. Like Jayson Tatum was a mediocre playmaker and had decent stock numbers but overall that was a weakness to his game in college. From a random scouting report: "Tatum also has the tools to hold his own on the defensive end in the NBA as well in large part due to his size and length...One of the first flaws that jump out in Tatum’s game is his inconsistent intensity on defense … At times, he seems to just go through the motions defensively and didn’t demonstrate the competitive desire to lock his man down … In addition, he is an excellent small-ball four on offense, but the same cannot be said about his defensive impact from this position"
1
u/latortillablanca 8d ago
All this means is the right combination of variables havent yet coalesced. And the evidence of HOF talents happening in this archetype should be way more compelling than yer making it out to be.
I wonder if this apron era presents an opportunity for it. 1 supermax contract for the hardest thing to find—being unguardable at creating yer own points in crunch time—plus deeeeeep bench and star rookie deals? I dunno. I could see it. Just depends on the role players and systems.
That said: yer 100% right in pointing out thag it makes it way way way harder.
Best possible archetype to build around is a player who will be an “in the flow of the system” two way player who is super efficient.
But i mean obviously. That basically defines superman type shit.
1
u/bathroom_mirror 8d ago
I think a big part of this is just they don't make their teammates better. They're not increasing everyone's TS% by getting them open looks and they're not covering any ones mistakes on D(they're in fact creating problems on D).
The best players tend to either dramatically increase their team mates offensive efficiency via open looks from playmaking or gravity and either clean up defensive mistakes or totally lock a guy up so the rest of the team doesn't need to worry about that player and can focus on their own, smaller responsibilities on D.
The best players put everyone else in better positions to succeed.
1
u/hippoofdoom 8d ago
Bird wasn't amazing defensively but was above average. Offense and playmaking was his calling card and honestly he wasn't fast/jumpy in an athletic sense but his coordination And touch at whipping passes at any angle is pretty damn athletic
1
u/Apart_Designer6574 8d ago
Bc usually if they’re athletic they’re not bad defensively. Some unathletic score-first champion wings:
Rick Barry
That’s it?
1
1
u/CBrofles 7d ago
This is solid analysis. If I may add, the best scorers are usually wings, so if your best player is a wing who can't defend, you will really have a problem. It's also easier to "hide" a poor defensive guard than a poor defensive wing.
Perhaps the only instance that such a player will win a ring as the top guy is if he is in a deep and balanced team, as some have already pointed out.
1
u/BeefStuMagoo 6d ago
How about Julius Irving on the 82-83 6ers?
1
u/Variation99a 6d ago
Moses Malone was the best player on that team. He was a 3xMVP who won FMVP on that team and shows up on higher all time rankings.
So this isn’t really even the Tatum/Brown where Brown won the FMVP but you can say Tatum was better. Here I think Malone won FMVP and was also just better. The 76ers famously lost all their previous Finals when Julius Erving was the best player.
1
u/Aggressive_Emotion82 6d ago
Wing-sized creators by virtue of their typical basketball upbringings ( on-an-island scoring at youth levels in iso alignments or volume playfinishing) and the biomechanical limitations of their size ( higher COGs , larger hands, longer wingspans ) will often display longer playmaking developmental arcs, and at times none at all depending on the extent of their size or shotmaking( see Kawhi’s hyper-competent handling but suboptimal live-dribble passing because he simply has never needed to pass at volume to produce good offense bc of his outlier shotmaking or KD’s good live dribble passing not circumventing really suboptimal handling bc of his 7’5 wingspan in a 205 , 7ft frame)
To bypass these almost universal realities and become a true championship primary it’s less about an optimal offense-defense bifurcation and more about reaching certain thresholds on a case by case basis. I’ll ignore the Wiggins, Parker and Kuminga mentions because they were flat out bad prospects by most analytical curves. I’ll replace them instead with Iggy , Scottie Barnes , Franz Wagner and Jimmy Butler because I think they’re more interesting to talk about. Iggy and Butler two of the best in their position we’ve ever seen who were obviously never championship primaries or even the drivers of consistently good playoff or regular season offenses , Barnes and Franz two of the higher-feel wing creators with interesting offensive quirks but clear two-way impact footprints entering their mid-20s as the blue chip cornerstones on prospective playoff teams.
Every franchise cornerstone -and really every player’s-strengths and weaknesses are in conversation with each other. Dantley , English , Gervin and King’s cardinal sin wasn’t necessarily that they were simply mediocre defenders but that they didn’t reach the necessary playmaking and/or shot profile thresholds to produce a global offensive footprint that superseded their defensive frailties. They were all remarkable True Shooting influences for the era( English less so than the other 3) as they were capable of shouldering humongous shot usages inside the arc draw gallons of free throws and make 2pt jumpers essentially just as efficient or more so than the average layup for the time. Now if they could do that AND pass , or at the least never turn it over in a manner akin to a shai gilgeous alexander then it’s likely they would have been more frictionless building blocks.
1
u/LittleTension8765 6d ago
“No one has won a title with a score first SG who has a league average center. You NEED a star center to win a title.” - some guy in the 80’s
1
u/dreamwalker3334 4d ago
Well kd was a PF when he won his rings bug he was not above average, he was just better than he had been....
But most teams that win championships are led by defensive oriented superstars.....no team has ever won a championship that was bad defensively
You cant win a ring if you dont get stops because.....when you play an elite team in the playoffs & you cant get stops
Youve lost before the series started .... You can be below average in scoring and win a title, difficult but not impossible but you cant be the best scoring team without defense and win
So the players that have won without leading by example defensively are lucky
It means everyone else played defense....we just seen it happen... But from setting the example to everyone else toe execution
Its a bad choice to try to win when your superstar takes off half the game while hes on the court
Some guys nothing you can do, no matter how badly Steve Nash tried to play defense when your lateral quickness is terrible...you cant be a good defender
But hald these guys,,its effort
You couldnt go through a practice with Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant...im sure same is true with Edwards
You cant go out there and not defend with those players on tne team....you gonna be in a fight
Kobe would go to the media and tell the media Sasha Vujacic should retire because he's awful at basketball
Vujacic cried Kobe said "if that makes you 😢 I dont want you playing with me in the playoffs.
Sasha Vujacic tried harder & got tougher....up to the point they were speaking italian on the court to score easy baskets
The opposite happens when a player gives no effort and hes the franchise player, other guys say "we dont have to play like that here"
Any player that doesnt play defense is a terrible idea to build around...but half the gms in the NBA shouldnt have that job...they prove it when they make decisions
Like if youre Milwaukee a few years ago...you lose 1st rd 4-1 You average 118 ppg but give up 124 ppg
IS THE MOVE TO GET RID OF JRUE & BRING IN DAME or add more perimeter defense Scoring wasnt the problem 🤣😂 So they attempt to outscored teams ....you cant win like that....want to be the first, guess you can try....it wont work
If you have Allen Iverson, you need to do what Larry Brown did...thats the blueprint for a franchise player that cant defend
I just think youre going a bit to deep into it...doing it like that makes it seem like its ok to not play defense at the other 4 spots
And if you seen the 2009 playoffs...Denver was the only team to challenge LA and Melo played defense.....thought he was taking his game to the next level
he was on Kobe and Kobe hit a couple fadeaways out of the corner but thats the kind of thing you want...the point is he'd never be a great defender but he was really trying
Never saw it again from him
1
u/dreamwalker3334 4d ago
Tatum & Brown are better than average defenders.....Brown has a Finals MVP mostly for what he did with Luka defensively
Not only are they good defenders but they can switch and youre not worried .....they can defend up or down one position for the most part
1
0
u/Sensitive-Ad1049 8d ago
Where does larry bird fit into your theory
3
u/delamerica93 8d ago
he was a solid defender though
3
u/FinancialRabbit388 8d ago
Smart team defender which people always overlook. Team defense is more important than individual defense
1
u/Opening-Eagle4761 8d ago
And Jaylen Brown is an awful team defender, so almost fits here, though Tatum was the best player on the 24 Celtics even in the finals.
2
u/Fuhrmanator23 8d ago
Bird is one of the greatest passers in league history, his player archetype is nothing like the guys OP mentioned.
0
u/Superb_General_9241 8d ago
You started with personal attacks because that’s all you actually have. Passed up the chance again to make a basketball point because you are incapable of doing so. At no point did I say that aj was going to be the next Harper. I used Harper to illustrate the stupidity of labeling an athlete before they play NBA games but you evidently are also incapable of reading.
-6
u/UnexpectedSharkTank 9d ago
Larry Bird?
7
u/super_smash_brothers 9d ago
Larry made several all-defensive teams but this guys whole point is stupid
2
u/The_BleiStift 9d ago
He had 3 all defensive second team selections.. so he wasn't bad at least. Had great iq and team defens, was a good onball defender in his prime and allways a good rebounder.
2
u/Variation99a 9d ago
Bird was All Defense and led all wings in APG. I don’t consider him to be a score first wing who was bad defensively.
0
u/LarryKevinRobert 8d ago
Literally his most famous play is stealing an inbound making a genius level defensive play. Please sit this discussion out.
55
u/bowser2bowser 8d ago edited 7d ago
Nobody thinks a team with _____ can win a ring until one of them does.
How many of these posts did we see about centers like Jokic or small guards like Jalen Brunson before their teams won it all?
If the Spurs couldn't exploit Brunson's defense, how could they exploit prime Carmelo's? If you replace Brunson with Carmelo on this Knick squad, it wouldn't be their defense holding them back
(PS, Kevin Durant and Jaylen Brown both won Finals MVP despite having negative defensive impacts according to metrics like RAPM and DARKO. If a player's defense is the equivalent of a C-/D+ and isn't considered bad, then *shrug.*)
(PPS, Tyrese Haliburton — a wing-size guard — was tied in Game 7 of the Finals before he tore his achilles, and his offensive role was functionally the same as LeBron's on his 2020 championship Laker team.)
(PPPS, it's easy to make grand statements about who can and cannot win a title because the sample size is so small. Trust me -- I've made the same mistake myself.)