Best Big Threes in basketball right now

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,191
Reaction score
15,230
I think Boston is more of a big two plus two very goods (Holiday, Porzingis).

Milwaukee is more of a big two plus a question mark three.

Denver is still mostly a one man show, in my opinion, with some pretty good complementary pieces.

The Lakers are a big two (that may not have much left in the tank), and nobody else close to being a three.

Miami is just a good team with good coaching. The analogy doesn't even apply.

Really, we are the only ones with a big three. Our question mark is really just how much of anything else do we have.
I agree with most of this but to me, our real question mark is just how much of anything else do we have if we lose a couple stars. If we stay healthy I think we'll be okay with the roster we have.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
I agree with most of this but to me, our real question mark is just how much of anything else do we have if we lose a couple stars. If we stay healthy I think we'll be okay with the roster we have.

How much is any contender if they lose a couple of stars.
 

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,191
Reaction score
15,230
How much is any contender if they lose a couple of stars.
True but I think we'll be hurt worse than most if we lose 2 stars. We've seen a lot of teams step up when they're missing their best players, I'm not sure we'll see that from us this season. I think we're a little weaker than most good teams at our 4 through 6 spots.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
I think Boston is more of a big two plus two very goods (Holiday, Porzingis).

Milwaukee is more of a big two plus a question mark three.

Denver is still mostly a one man show, in my opinion, with some pretty good complementary pieces.

The Lakers are a big two (that may not have much left in the tank), and nobody else close to being a three.

Miami is just a good team with good coaching. The analogy doesn't even apply.

Really, we are the only ones with a big three. Our question mark is really just how much of anything else do we have.

I think Boston is a legit three-star team with Holiday, Brown and Tatum.
 

Hoop Head

ASFN Icon
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Posts
16,450
Reaction score
11,507
Location
Tempe, AZ
True but I think we'll be hurt worse than most if we lose 2 stars. We've seen a lot of teams step up when they're missing their best players, I'm not sure we'll see that from us this season. I think we're a little weaker than most good teams at our 4 through 6 spots.

I think that's dependent on which 2 stars. Say Beal goes down, I think we'll be fine as Gordon should be able to fill in for a stretch. If we lose KD? We're in a trouble.

I think Booker can carry us through a 1st round series and keep us afloat for the season. KD can carry us for a stretch during the season but not playoffs, not alone. Beal? We're screwed. So basically the pecking order dictates who can carry us and keep us in the hunt but we'll need 2+ to see any postseason success.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
True but I think we'll be hurt worse than most if we lose 2 stars. We've seen a lot of teams step up when they're missing their best players, I'm not sure we'll see that from us this season. I think we're a little weaker than most good teams at our 4 through 6 spots.

I don't think any contender is going deep in the playoffs with only one star.

The Nuggets might have the best chance with Jokic.
 

nashman

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 3, 2007
Posts
10,551
Reaction score
7,263
Location
Queen Creek, AZ
I don't think any contender is going deep in the playoffs with only one star.

The Nuggets might have the best chance with Jokic.
This… and the Nuggets without Murray would struggle! I think they are gonna struggle anyway they lack depth they had last year and everyone got better while they got worse. They are not the juggernaut some people seem to think they are, good team but hardly some invincible dynasty. They had the easiest path ever to a title, wish we would have gotten to play an 8 seed for a title…
 

Chaplin

Better off silent
Joined
May 13, 2002
Posts
45,234
Reaction score
15,080
Location
Round Rock, TX
True but I think we'll be hurt worse than most if we lose 2 stars. We've seen a lot of teams step up when they're missing their best players, I'm not sure we'll see that from us this season. I think we're a little weaker than most good teams at our 4 through 6 spots.
I’d like to see your research on that considering we are arguably the deepest team in the NBA.
 

95pro

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 10, 2007
Posts
12,280
Reaction score
3,870
True but I think we'll be hurt worse than most if we lose 2 stars. We've seen a lot of teams step up when they're missing their best players, I'm not sure we'll see that from us this season. I think we're a little weaker than most good teams at our 4 through 6 spots.

Our supporting cast was wayy worse last season, and they held tough. I think we have more reliable shooters now and more backcourt depth that should be enough to hold serve with one star on the roster.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
This… and the Nuggets without Murray would struggle! I think they are gonna struggle anyway they lack depth they had last year and everyone got better while they got worse. They are not the juggernaut some people seem to think they are, good team but hardly some invincible dynasty. They had the easiest path ever to a title, wish we would have gotten to play an 8 seed for a title…

I'm not taking anything away from the Nuggets. They were legitimately the best team in the NBA last season.

However, we saw how the Suns beat them 4-0 in the 2021 playoffs without Murray.
 

95pro

ASFN Icon
Joined
May 10, 2007
Posts
12,280
Reaction score
3,870
I'm not taking anything away from the Nuggets. They were legitimately the best team in the NBA last season.

However, we saw how the Suns beat them 4-0 in the 2021 playoffs without Murray.

Its just really a ton of luck too. I mean no injuries to anyone for the nuggets, the #1 east seed goes down, the west is in a bit of turmoil with all the trades happening. No doubt their elevation helped them since they were the top seed.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
Its just really a ton of luck too. I mean no injuries to anyone for the nuggets, the #1 east seed goes down, the west is in a bit of turmoil with all the trades happening. No doubt their elevation helped them since they were the top seed.

Injuries always play a key role. It does involve luck for a team to stay healthy. IMO, the elevation factor is overrated.
 

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
89,276
Reaction score
62,709
Its just really a ton of luck too. I mean no injuries to anyone for the nuggets, the #1 east seed goes down, the west is in a bit of turmoil with all the trades happening. No doubt their elevation helped them since they were the top seed.

Their elevation didn’t keep them from getting routed in 2022 or 2021.

They were just the best team last year.
 

GatorAZ

feed hopkins
Joined
Oct 17, 2011
Posts
24,587
Reaction score
16,919
Location
The Giant Toaster
I think Boston is a legit three-star team with Holiday, Brown and Tatum.

Without a doubt. Porzingis will be their 3rd leading scorer but Jrue will be top-3 for them in impact, maybe top-2. If both teams are healthy Boston is the worst matchup for the Suns especially if they go big.
 

Phrazbit

ASFN Icon
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Posts
19,883
Reaction score
10,767
I’d like to see your research on that considering we are arguably the deepest team in the NBA.

We're deeper than I thought we'd be but we've only got 8 guys that are proven as rotation guys and of those proven guys 4 are major injury risks.

After those dudes we have a lot of players who've yet to prove much and struggled to find minutes... and some have been just plain lousy.
 

Mainstreet

Cruisin' Mainstreet
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Posts
113,463
Reaction score
53,153
Without a doubt. Porzingis will be their 3rd leading scorer but Jrue will be top-3 for them in impact, maybe top-2. If both teams are healthy Boston is the worst matchup for the Suns especially if they go big.

Yeah, Boston looks to be the toughest Finals matchup but I will worry about that when the Suns get there.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,246
Reaction score
53,662
Location
SoCal
I think Boston is more of a big two plus two very goods (Holiday, Porzingis).

Milwaukee is more of a big two plus a question mark three.

Denver is still mostly a one man show, in my opinion, with some pretty good complementary pieces.

The Lakers are a big two (that may not have much left in the tank), and nobody else close to being a three.

Miami is just a good team with good coaching. The analogy doesn't even apply.

Really, we are the only ones with a big three. Our question mark is really just how much of anything else do we have.
I agree with all this but I think you’re overlooking murray with the nuggets
 

PHI PHX PHAN

Rookie
Joined
Feb 9, 2023
Posts
53
Reaction score
75
Location
Philly
Without a doubt. Porzingis will be their 3rd leading scorer but Jrue will be top-3 for them in impact, maybe top-2. If both teams are healthy Boston is the worst matchup for the Suns especially if they go big.
I have us vs Bos in the finals and now instead of 6 I have it being a 7 game series. A healthy Boston team is a nightmare for anybody.
I think we are one of maybe 4 or 5 teams that can go toe to toe with them.
 

Raindog

I didn't come here to be liked!
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Posts
4,939
Reaction score
5,782
I agree with all this but I think you’re overlooking murray with the nuggets
Murray is very good, no doubt. I'm just not sure if I would quite put him on that "elite" tier just yet, mostly due to the injury issues which have taken out a good portion of his early career.

And I'm not sure if he hadn't been playing along side Jokic all these years, he would be on anyone's radar as one of the best guards in the league. Just my opinion.
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,246
Reaction score
53,662
Location
SoCal
Murray is very good, no doubt. I'm just not sure if I would quite put him on that "elite" tier just yet, mostly due to the injury issues which have taken out a good portion of his early career.

And I'm not sure if he hadn't been playing along side Jokic all these years, he would be on anyone's radar as one of the best guards in the league. Just my opinion.
I think his performance last year in championship run pretty much cements his being at least in the beal range.

And I think it’s folly to say “if he hadn’t been playing alongside . . .” There are very few top players that haven’t played alongside another top player.
 

AzStevenCal

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Posts
36,191
Reaction score
15,230
I think his performance last year in championship run pretty much cements his being at least in the beal range.

And I think it’s folly to say “if he hadn’t been playing alongside . . .” There are very few top players that haven’t played alongside another top player.
Yeah injuries and inconsistency have plagued both of them (Murray and Beal) but that's true for pretty much all but the top tiered stars.
 

CardsSunsDbacks

Not So Skeptical
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Posts
9,966
Reaction score
6,247
Yeah injuries and inconsistency have plagued both of them (Murray and Beal) but that's true for pretty much all but the top tiered stars.
Murray is a bit of an enigma. When you compare the players based off regular season stats than Beal has been easily the better of the two players. However, Murray just finds another gear come playoffs. Regular season was nothing all too special averaging 20/6 on 53% EFG%, but in the playoffs he was one of the better players in all the playoffs with 26/7 on almost 55% EFG%.
 

Raindog

I didn't come here to be liked!
Joined
Apr 22, 2008
Posts
4,939
Reaction score
5,782
I think his performance last year in championship run pretty much cements his being at least in the beal range.

And I think it’s folly to say “if he hadn’t been playing alongside . . .” There are very few top players that haven’t played alongside another top player.
Just curious - where would you rate Donovan Mitchell vis a vis Murray? Or Anthony Edwards?
 

Ouchie-Z-Clown

I'm better than Mulli!
Joined
Sep 16, 2002
Posts
61,246
Reaction score
53,662
Location
SoCal
Murray is a bit of an enigma. When you compare the players based off regular season stats than Beal has been easily the better of the two players. However, Murray just finds another gear come playoffs. Regular season was nothing all too special averaging 20/6 on 53% EFG%, but in the playoffs he was one of the better players in all the playoffs with 26/7 on almost 55% EFG%.
And he produces on a perennial playoff team and not a dregs of the league team.
 
Top