[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

nba finals teams and why we're not on the path
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 1 of 3  1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
1/25/2007  2:47 PM
88 lakers (magic), pistons (isiah)
89 pistons (isiah), lakers (magic)
90 pistons (isiah), blazers (drexler)
91 bulls (jordan), lakers (magic)
92 bulls (jordan), blazers (drexler)
93 bulls (jordan), suns (barkley)
94 rockets (hakeem), knicks (ewing)
95 rockets (hakeem), magic (shaq)
96 bulls (jordan), sonics (payton/kemp)
97 bulls (jordan), jazz (malone/stockton)
98 bulls (jordan), jazz (malone/stockton)
99 spurs (duncan/robinson), knicks (ewing)*
00 lakers (shaq), pacers (miller)
01 lakers (shaq), 76ers (iverson)
02 lakers (shaq), nets (kidd)
03 spurs (duncan), nets (kidd)
04 pistons**, lakers (shaq)
05 spurs (duncan), pistons**
06 heat (shaq/wade), dallas (dirk)

* - strike year
** - only team without at top5 player

looking back at all the finals teams for the past 18 years (and you can go back even further), i've brought to light that you need an NBA superstar and really a top5 player to win a title or even play for one (sans the pistons of 2004).

but even more interesting is that this top5 player usually is a top 5 and in most cases top 3 draft pick. the major exceptions being malone/stockton (who are in the 50 greatest list), reggie miller (who i think is on the list also) and dirk last year. but they are the exceptions and none of them won it.

it's another point as to why i don't feel we are building towards a title...an AWFUL season is required WITH a top pick coming your way to land the guy or heavy duty cap space to lure one away (shaq to the lakers). we have to adjust our strategy.
AUTOADVERT
efw
Posts: 20669
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/10/2005
Member: #1002
1/25/2007  2:50 PM
doesn't detroit prove the exception to the rule?

i don't think anyone says we're a championship team now. hopefully in the future, we can package some of our guys who are playing really well to get a top 50 player.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
1/25/2007  2:52 PM
Posted by efw:

doesn't detroit prove the exception to the rule?

It proves that our odds are VERY VERY minimal. Fighting against probability is usually a losing battle (by definition).
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
djsunyc
Posts: 44929
Alba Posts: 42
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #536
1/25/2007  2:52 PM
Posted by efw:

doesn't detroit prove the exception to the rule?

i don't think anyone says we're a championship team now. hopefully in the future, we can package some of our guys who are playing really well to get a top 50 player.

yes, i said they were the exception. but they also were built around frontcourt defense and was coached by one of the best in the biz.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
1/25/2007  2:55 PM
We're not in this to win a championship, we're in it to be better than Layden.
efw
Posts: 20669
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/10/2005
Member: #1002
1/25/2007  3:10 PM
unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.
TrueBlue
Posts: 29144
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 9/20/2006
Member: #1172
1/25/2007  3:10 PM
You might as well Asterisk Det championship via Kobe handing it to them on a silver platter because he was in full blown Tank B**** MODE, IT'S MY TEAM GET SHAQ OFF OF IT OR ELSE I"LL BOLT IN FA TO THE CLIPPERS.
LMFAO @ the Bio [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephon_Marbury[/url]
martin
Posts: 80901
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
1/25/2007  3:11 PM
Posted by BlueSeats:

We're not in this to win a championship, we're in it to be better than Layden.

or just make more $$ than last year.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
1/25/2007  4:08 PM
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Bippity10
Posts: 13999
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/26/2004
Member: #574
1/25/2007  4:13 PM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.

Excellent post Solace.

Wait, who said that?
I just hope that people will like me
nyk4ever
Posts: 41012
Alba Posts: 12
Joined: 1/12/2005
Member: #848
USA
1/25/2007  4:20 PM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.

Good post Solace. I've made the same exact point(building in reverse by getting the roleplayers before the superstar) on this forum for a long time now.
"OMG - did we just go on a two-trade-wining-streak?" -SupremeCommander
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
1/25/2007  4:22 PM
Yes Detriot is the exception to the rule that they have five great players in the starting lineup...

The most clutch shot making pg in the league that can score with anyone but doesn't for the great good of the team

The best defensive front court trio in the league and the nba best shooter off the screen

3 allstars and the defensive player of the year is a real exception
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
1/25/2007  4:24 PM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.
Really? I think the team's done a lot of "starphucking" from McDyess to Marbury to Francis. I bet Isiah was hoping for a superstars when he got Jamal and Curry too. The team's gone for plenty of stars--just the wrong, quick way.
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
1/25/2007  4:24 PM
99 Come one Dude Houston/Spree/Ewing/Camby/LJ pick your allstar talent from that bunch
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/25/2007  4:26 PM
i don't think i can really count guys like Drexler, Miller, Kemp, Payton, Ewing or Dirk as top 5 players at the time their teams made the Finals, but i get your general point here... you need a legitimate star player or 2 & some good supporting players to put around them to make the Finals... that's pretty much been a constant for every team that's ever made the Finals like you pointed out... i don't think we absolutely have to have the next Shaq, Duncan or Jordan to do it though.
it's another point as to why i don't feel we are building towards a title...an AWFUL season is required WITH a top pick coming your way to land the guy or heavy duty cap space to lure one away (shaq to the lakers). we have to adjust our strategy.

that's why i wanted to tank when Lebron, Melo & Bosh were coming out... instead we won just enough games to make sure we ended up w/a crappy pick & took Sweetney instead.

to be fair to Isiah though, no one could have projected the team would be as bad as it was last season w/LB coaching this team & w/the addition of Curry & a few other rookies to the roster... i think the Curry trade was generally well received around here except for a few of the usual naysayers.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
1/25/2007  4:28 PM
Posted by nyk4ever:
Posted by Solace:
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.

Good post Solace. I've made the same exact point(building in reverse by getting the roleplayers before the superstar) on this forum for a long time now.


yeah, Bip always says the complete opposite... what a dummy.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
efw
Posts: 20669
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/10/2005
Member: #1002
1/25/2007  4:33 PM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by efw:

unfortunately i think as the league expands ever further (team in LV soon) and the talent dilutes we'll see clubs that play like teams will win more often than not.
What struck me about detroit was not that it was some fluke but that they beat a Laker team that most thought was unbeatable. Superstars can only carry their team so far. KG hasn't gone anywhere. Pierce hasn't.
It's not about having one superstar, it's about playing like a team. It's just that the perennial championship teams had both.

You're arguing the inverse. However, the argument isn't that a superstar guarantees a trip to the finals. It's that not having one virtually guarantees that you won't get there (with a few very rare exceptions). You need a star AND a good supporting cast, yes. But a good supporting cast is generally MUCH easier to get once you have that star player. In NY, we've done things in the reverse for the last six years. Rather than doing everything possible to get the star (the difficult piece), we add good role players. Then we question why we're a below .500 team. We have nice pieces... that would be supplimentary on a contending team. For a developing team, we need a star or stars, otherwise, we've already lost the game before we've begun.

I can think of a lot of teams that build up with role players first and then aquire a star. But, like I said, if it's not a team to begin with, a star won't get you very far - except in ticket sales. Also, building a team around a star is harder than you make it seem.

newyorknewyork
Posts: 30353
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #541
1/25/2007  4:36 PM
Detroit shouldn't have even won the championship.

If Shaq & Kobe don't hate each other at that time. Then Detroit doesn't steal the championship
https://vote.nba.com/en Vote for your Knicks.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
1/25/2007  4:36 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:

Really? I think the team's done a lot of "starphucking" from McDyess to Marbury to Francis. I bet Isiah was hoping for a superstars when he got Jamal and Curry too. The team's gone for plenty of stars--just the wrong, quick way.

And that's the problem... throughout the history of the NBA, it's extremely rare to be able to trade for a superstar. The only ways that seem to work with some success are through the draft, and occasionally through free agency if you have the cap room. The star is almost aways a big man and almost always one of the top 5-10 players in the league. McDyess, Marbury, Francis, Curry, Crawford don't qualify. For Isiah to think that they do shows why he doesn't have the right mindset.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
1/25/2007  4:38 PM
Posted by efw:

I can think of a lot of teams that build up with role players first and then aquire a star. But, like I said, if it's not a team to begin with, a star won't get you very far - except in ticket sales. Also, building a team around a star is harder than you make it seem.

Teams that qualify under the criteria above? Please list them. Building around a star does have its challenges, but hell, it shows a direction. You give yourself a chance. There are no guarantees. It's like that old saying, "You can't win a game in the first half, but you can sure as hell lose a game in the first half." Building a team around role players is losing a game in the first half.
Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
Page 1 of 3  1  2  3 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
nba finals teams and why we're not on the path
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy