The fact that they listed Brian Grant as a center, screws up my $15 team - twice. Grant did not play center in Portland. He may have played center in MIA, but in POR he was strictly a PF. He should have been listed behind Buck at PF for $0. Also, anyone not in the top 5 at their position should be available for $0 - that would include a true 3 & D guy like Wesley Matthews.
I made a couple assumptions - we are talking about assembling a team for today's, modern, 3-point heavy NBA and the goal is to win a championship (so built for post season success). In today's game, a guy like Clyde or Brandon Roy, or even Wesley Matthews can easily play the SF position. I am also assuming, per the article, that each player will be at their peak - meaning their best full season in a Portland uniform. With that in mind, my preferred line-up would have been:
PG - Terry Porter = $4
SG - C.J. McCollum = $2
SF - Brandon Roy = $4
PF - Buck Williams = $1
C - Bill Wlaton = $5
Total = $16
Well crap, $1 over the cap! If Brian Grant had been correctly listed as a PF at $0, I would have inserted him in place of Buck at PF and been right at $15.
PG - The reasons for my choices are that shooting, especially 3-point shooting is at a premium in today's NBA. I love Lillard, and if not for the $15 cap, he would be my staring PG. However, Porter, at his peak shot a much higher 3FG% than Dame. Dame scores more, but peak Porter was a much more efficient scorer. During his best season, Terry shot .415 3FG% and had a TS% of .623 - that's insane for a guard, we're talking Steph Curry MVP level shooting. Dame's career best TS% is .586. Porter was also a better passer and a better defender. So, cost no object, Dame is my starting PG. With the $15 cap, I go with Porter and save a buck.
SG - In today's NBA, C.J.'s shooting at $2 is really hard to pass up. Last season, C.J. shot .421 from 3-point range and led the league in FT% at .912. Those are very impressive numbers and makes him the best shooting SG this franchise has ever had. Unfortunately, because of BGrant being listed out of position at center, I will end up having to give up C.J. and go with Brandon Roy at SG - more on that below.
SF - In today's NBA, I'm moving the 6'6" Roy to SF. He had the size, strength and athleticism to play the position in today's game. During Roy's best season in Portland he had PER = 24.0, 13.5 WS and .223 WS/48. Those are some of the best numbers in those categories in franchise history. Too bad they didn't last, but this excise is based on peak performance and peak performance Brandon Roy was pretty damn good.
PF - in today's game, it would be nice to have a stretch 4 to spread the court, but we've never really had one in Portland. So, at $1 it's hard to pass up Buck's defense, rebounding, toughness, leadership and efficient scoring. Beside's he'd work fine with my center of choice, even in today's game. Today's game isn't just about 3-point shooting, it's about scoring efficiency (3-pointers + lay ups), and during his Blazer's career, Buck was all about efficient scoring. His first year in Portland, he averaged 13.6 ppg as the fifth option on offense. The following two seasons, he led the NBA in FG% at .602 and .604. In 1991-92., he also led the league in TS% at .651. That's efficient scoring!
C - Of all the players from the past, I think Bill Walton's game would be the most adaptable to today's NBA. In fact, I think Big Bill would absolutely flourish in the modern game. He would be a much bigger, much better, much less likely to get suspended during the finals and cost your team a championship version of Draymond Green. In 76-77 Walton led the league in both REB at 14.4 rpg ad blocked shots at 3.2 bpg. Those are outstanding numbers in any generation. With Walton at center, we would dominate the boards and he would be the ultimate rim protector. His high post passing game would also be perfect in today's NBA. As much as I loved Sabonis, in spite of his 3-point shooting (he never really shot that high of a 3FG% and never made more than 49 in a season), I don't think he would be well suited to the modern game. Sabas played during an era of big, powerful centers. At the time, his size and bulk we assets. In today's game, his incredibly slow foot speed would be routinely exploited in the pick and roll. Sabonins, because of his skills and high BBIQ would be a good player in any generation, but by the time he played for POR, he was already in his 30s and had suffered two ruptured Achilles's tendons. I would LOVE him coming off the bench and backing up Walton (Sabonis came off the bench his rookie year and had, by far, his most efficient season playing limited minutes as a back up), but Big Bill is my starting center.
Ok, that's all well and good, but I'm still over the cap by $1. My second choice also depends on Brian Grant being correctly listed at PF for $0. It also depends on anyone not listed being available for $0.
PG - Damian Lillard = $5
SG - Wesley Mattews = $0
SF - Clyde Drexler = $5
PF - Brian Grant = $0
C - Bill Walton = $5
Total = $15
This is the closest we can come to a modern superstar driven team. Dame, Clyde and Walton are our Big 3 and we fill in the other two positions with solid role players. Pre-injury Wes was a great 3 & D fourth option who can lock down the oppositions best perimeter scorer and BGrant gives us rebounding, interior defense and toughness.
Unfortunately, this starting 5 is also not posssible under the rules of the game as stated.
So, I have to go with:
PG - Terry Porter = $4
SG - Brandon Roy $4
SF - Scottie Pippin = $1
PF - Buck Williams = $1
C - Bill Walton = $5
Total = $15
That team would kick ass in the previous generation, but lacks 3-point shooting compared to other current top teams. That team would have great defense, rebounding and passing. So, they would still compete and would be well suited for the post season where the games slow down and defense, rebounding and efficient scoring become even more important. Ultimately, for the modern game, I prefer my first two choices, but given the imposed constraints, I think these five represent the best values at each position.
BNM
