EwingsGlass wrote:BRIGGS wrote:fishmike wrote:2004 they won the title, but it was no fluke. They made the conference finals for 6 straight years. They lost in the NBA finals once (3-4 vs. Spurs) and won one title (4-1 vs. the Shaq/Kobe/Payton/Malone/PhiJackson Lakers). Fun fact: The only guys to shoot over 40% for that Lakers series were Shaq and Rick Fox, and Fox shot 4-7 in 29 minutes over 3 games.The year they won the title they had one all star: Ben Wallace and he averaged 9.5ppg
Might be the best defensive team ever.
Chauncy/Rip/Tayshaun/Sheed/Big Ben were your starting 5 with Corliss Williamson, Lindsay Hunter, Okur and Elden Campbell off the bench.
So here are the questions to the UK faithful:
Is such a team model still viable in this NBA?
They didnt have a single great iso player. They played a team based offense. They were 15th in 3pg%. Their offense was 18th in PP100. They were 2nd (just behind Spurs) in opponents PP100. Their EFG% was 18th, while their EFG% against was 2nd. They were a middle of the road offense with a legendary defense.
Thibs has been able to create an impressive defense with pretty limited talent. Is this a viable path back to being an elite team?
Curious what you guys think...
No
This makes me think it is more viable!
The prominence of the 3 is real, but with longer more athletic players, I think guarding out to the 3pt line is more reasonable.
Yeah I think it’s possible if we are loaded with shooters and we excel at defending both the interior/3pt line. Even though Lakers had Bron and AD, I think without their elite defense they arnt sniffing a title.
