What's better:Defense or Offense?

First topic message reminder :

....?

A prolific scorer to a lockdown defender. I would rather take the former.

Allen Iverson will carry a franchise
Dirk Nowitski will carry a franchise.
Steve Nash will carry a franchise.

Yet these players play little to no defense.

Ben Wallace will not carry nothing.
Shane Battier is a role player.
Bruce Bowen is a role player.

A prolific scorer affects a game more than a great defender. That's why I'm a huge Gerald Wallace fan. The guy can defend and score.

You can't score on offense, and it turns up again to help out your Defense. It can go the other way, though.

Lets try not comparing Megastars to Role Players here.

Hakeem Olajuwon to Patrick Ewing.

Defensive Beast Mode wrote:

You can't score on offense, and it turns up again to help out your Defense. It can go the other way, though.

Lets try not comparing Megastars to Role Players here.

Hakeem Olajuwon to Patrick Ewing.

But why are they megastars in the first place SK? Because of their OFFENSE. I can't even name one player for a long long time who made the All-Star game

* because of their defense.

But without their defense they wouldn't be good in the first place.

Jordan.
1 DPOY
9 All Defense First Team

Ben Wallace khai!! 5 time all-star......

Defensive Beast Mode wrote:

But without their defense they wouldn't be good in the first place.

Jordan.
1 DPOY
9 All Defense First Team

...so you're saying that if MJ didn't play defense, he would be a garbage player? That's the biggest piece of shit I've ever heard...

And OK, Ben Wallace is good but he hasn't been to the ASG for a while.

Yeah, because he plays like shit on BOTH sides today.

Top Defense/Above Average Offense
Above Average Defense/Top Offense

Which would you take?

Actually, this arguement is useless. Defense is harder than offense. Both are more important, I was wrong that whole time. But what's more important than both of those is hustling. There.

Khai (DriveMyGerman) wrote:

Defensive Beast Mode wrote:

But without their defense they wouldn't be good in the first place.

Jordan.
1 DPOY
9 All Defense First Team

...so you're saying that if MJ didn't play defense, he would be a garbage player? That's the biggest piece of shit I've ever heard...

And OK, Ben Wallace is good but he hasn't been to the ASG for a while.

Agreed, Goerge gervin wouldn't know defense if i anal fucked him, But he's a HOFer!

Defensive Beast Mode wrote:

No. I can stop you (at the time you were my age), easily.

Your in over your head, When i was yyour age I would completely humiliate you.

Defensive Beast Mode wrote:

Defense is a much harder task to accomplish than offense, which annoys me when people brag about 20 PPG or a 30 point game, or if they make a few threes in a row.

Offensively, yuo could be a good shooter and know how to play, and you could score however much you like.
Defensively, you have to be tough, determined, agile, mobile, hustling, and most of all, you have to know what you are doing, and that's confusing.


Yeah, I bet you didn't pay attention when your coach tells you about shifting zone defense or help man to man defense, am I right?

I'm the only one that listens.
Everyone else is worried about running some damn suicides.
I like suicides, the feeling you get when you know you're getting better.
It might be because I'm first every time, though

Defensive players won't get noticed if you want to play at a different level, And you think your defending these "beastly PG's" when in reality these guys are probably "shitty PG's" that seem beastly in whatever "shitty league" you play in. Not to offend your defensive abilities or whatever but your hyping yourself.

you need a balance of both

Ill say 60% defense,and 40% offense

There are players like a Kobe Bryant,Dwyane Wade,Lebron James,Michael Jordan,Larry Bird that you can't stop no matter how good your defense is but you can slow down.

Certain players are going to score baskets no matter who's defending them and how great their defense is.

You do need defense though. As touched on before defense creates steals and opportunities at easy baskets etc. If you have a lead late in the game its good defense thats gets the job done and wins.

If your team cannot get a key stop when they need it its going to be really difficult to win.

2004 Pistons were a prime example of a Championship team with not alot of high scoring Superstars but played incredible defense and won in incredibly ugly fashion many games.

The Pistons D allowed them to get back in games simply because teams could'nt score on them and they were able to frustrate opponents

I agree about balance, but i would say 70%offense 30% defense, Thats how the great legendary teams of the 80's,90's were constructed..

I agree with KONJ and Visa. Both are important, but more offense is needed. 60/40 or 70/30 seems about right

You can't win if you can't score

I have both equal 50/50

You need defense as individual to stop/slow down someone and put him on a bad night and then have good offense to crush him in offense.That's it

Defenders are more appreacated since defense wins championships but there were ordered players who couldn't be stopped

For me,my individual perimeter defense and shot blocking skills are that much great as my shooting and passing skills,rebounding skills as well....

Chosen One wrote:

Offense.....

I like defense but when u play a game most people look at it as whoever scores the most points,they dont look at it like whoever allows the least points

Both are important but if u have a team of the best offensive players and the worst defenders and a team of the best defenders and the worst offensive players who would win?

Hmmm, nice. I do agree with the fact that people do look at who scores the most. If your saying which one is better to watch, I would say offense. If your talking about which one is more IMPORTANT, then I would say BOTH. Look at it this way, You can be excellent at defense and get the ball but when you get to offense and you suck at offense then how would you score and try to win. I would say you need to be good in both defense and offense.

Both are important

If you're all offense and no defense:
You can score 250 points in a game. But when you're allowing 251 points a game, then you won't be successful.

If you're all defense and no offense:
Good job, you're limiting your opponent to around 60 ppg. But when you can only score 25 a game as a team, what's the point?

VISA every player in the NBA can be stopped on any given night.

Defense is more important, but that doesn't mean that a uptempo Eurocentric offensive team can't win a championships. Look at D'Antoni's Suns. Yes they lost to the defensively oriented Spurs, but they could have won championships and were close. Luck played a part in it as well they weren't lucky enough. I mean Dallas beat them in the WCF and that was the season Phoenix made it to the WCF w/o Amar'e for the season. Dallas wasn't a tough-nosed defensive team at all, but they won. Phoenix could have won in any one of those years.

As, for the Knicks when they get and it will be when not if they get the players they want come 2010 off-season. The offense would be in full force and more likely would resemble what Mike D had in Phoenix. In the East offense could prevail and head to the Finals and maybe win it. Let's not write off the fact that Mike D's system can't win a championship. That is what I love about Mike D is that he stays true to his philosophy despite the critics.