There are 150 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

The best team never to win an NBA title

That picture of Jordan is awesome
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,486
Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:
Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by nicedraw94080:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
Originally posted by nicedraw94080:

Good Lord.

Let me guess , Pippen should be in this picture too?

No. It's that...

1) Some of the people included are ridiculous. Dan Majerle, Rik Smits, John Starks? Was Hersey Hawkins not available?

2) The Bulls won 6 titles. Most of the legit players in that pic had careers that spanned 2-3 times that long. I mean hell, Stockton & Malone were together for EIGHTEEN YEARS and only won the West twice. But it was MJ and MJ alone that prevented them from winning titles.

I was about to say that.

So your saying MJ didn't stop them twice?

Twice...not a generation. I guess, I want a poster with Ben Wallace and a picture of GP and Malone representing the players whose dreams he shattered. Obviously, Jordan had a lot to do with Reggie Miller not winning a title against the Lakers.
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by Joecool:

Kings were awesome but just weren't athletic enough which is why the ball always seemed to not bounce in their favor. They also didn't have the "clutch" player as Peja and Webber weren't critical game situation guys.

Not athletic enough? I disagree. That team was lauded for its uptempo, quick play. Chris Webber, pre-injury, was one of the most athletic PF's in NBA history. Doug Christie, Bobby Jackson, Mike Bibby (only his 4th season), Gerald Wallace (if you want to go that far)...all athletic. Athleticism was not why we lost to the Lakers; we had more.

8-man rotation of...
Mike Bibby-Doug Christie-Bobby Jackson
Peja Stojakovic-Chris Webber-Hedo Turkoglu
Vlade Divac-Scot Pollard
with Gerald Wallace.

I'll take that team against any non-championship team of my generation.

Yes that team deserved to beat LAL, no that team would not have beaten any of the squads that Jordan beat in his 2nd 3peat.

Obviously impossible to say, but I maintain my stance. The Kings were actually very similar to the Sonics team. Scoring PG, role playing SG, Euro shooting SF, athletic stud PF.

Jazz were a damn good team that Sac battled many times. Took the 98/99 Jazz (basically same lineup as the Finals team the year before) to the limit with no Bibby, no Christie, J-Will at PG and Peja as a minor bench player. Took a Stockton buzzer beater in Game 4 and an overtime win in Game 5 to beat Sac 3-2.

Perhaps a WhatIfSports tourney to decide it all?

Let's not get carried away by trying to put Bibby in the same boat as Payton. Hawkins was significantly better than Christie, Schrempf and Peja were about even. Their only clear advantage was at center.

Wouldn't put Bibby in the same category as Payton; Payton takes that easily, just pointing out vague similarities. Not willing to concede that Hawkins was significantly better than Christie. I'll give Hersey a slight edge in offense, even though Christie was extremely efficient (46/35/85) and basically served as a second PG. But defense is all Doug, and he'd draw Payton in this matchup. I'll take Webber over Kemp -- maybe that's biased -- but Webb was an all-around stud back then. And Vlade over Ervin Johnson/Sam Perkins is a Kings advantage.

A good matchup for sure.
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by Joecool:

Kings were awesome but just weren't athletic enough which is why the ball always seemed to not bounce in their favor. They also didn't have the "clutch" player as Peja and Webber weren't critical game situation guys.

Not athletic enough? I disagree. That team was lauded for its uptempo, quick play. Chris Webber, pre-injury, was one of the most athletic PF's in NBA history. Doug Christie, Bobby Jackson, Mike Bibby (only his 4th season), Gerald Wallace (if you want to go that far)...all athletic. Athleticism was not why we lost to the Lakers; we had more.

8-man rotation of...
Mike Bibby-Doug Christie-Bobby Jackson
Peja Stojakovic-Chris Webber-Hedo Turkoglu
Vlade Divac-Scot Pollard
with Gerald Wallace.

I'll take that team against any non-championship team of my generation.

Yes that team deserved to beat LAL, no that team would not have beaten any of the squads that Jordan beat in his 2nd 3peat.

Obviously impossible to say, but I maintain my stance. The Kings were actually very similar to the Sonics team. Scoring PG, role playing SG, Euro shooting SF, athletic stud PF.

Jazz were a damn good team that Sac battled many times. Took the 98/99 Jazz (basically same lineup as the Finals team the year before) to the limit with no Bibby, no Christie, J-Will at PG and Peja as a minor bench player. Took a Stockton buzzer beater in Game 4 and an overtime win in Game 5 to beat Sac 3-2.

Perhaps a WhatIfSports tourney to decide it all?

Let's not get carried away by trying to put Bibby in the same boat as Payton. Hawkins was significantly better than Christie, Schrempf and Peja were about even. Their only clear advantage was at center.

Wouldn't put Bibby in the same category as Payton; Payton takes that easily, just pointing out vague similarities. Not willing to concede that Hawkins was significantly better than Christie. I'll give Hersey a slight edge in offense, even though Christie was extremely efficient (46/35/85) and basically served as a second PG. But defense is all Doug, and he'd draw Payton in this matchup. I'll take Webber over Kemp -- maybe that's biased -- but Webb was an all-around stud back then. And Vlade over Ervin Johnson/Sam Perkins is a Kings advantage.

A good matchup for sure.

For me, the difference at PG is too great. GP got it done at both ends of the floor. I'd take the Sonics team easily over that Kings team.
[ Edited by TheSixthRing on May 31, 2011 at 11:50 PM ]
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,486
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by andes14:
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by Joecool:

Kings were awesome but just weren't athletic enough which is why the ball always seemed to not bounce in their favor. They also didn't have the "clutch" player as Peja and Webber weren't critical game situation guys.

Not athletic enough? I disagree. That team was lauded for its uptempo, quick play. Chris Webber, pre-injury, was one of the most athletic PF's in NBA history. Doug Christie, Bobby Jackson, Mike Bibby (only his 4th season), Gerald Wallace (if you want to go that far)...all athletic. Athleticism was not why we lost to the Lakers; we had more.

8-man rotation of...
Mike Bibby-Doug Christie-Bobby Jackson
Peja Stojakovic-Chris Webber-Hedo Turkoglu
Vlade Divac-Scot Pollard
with Gerald Wallace.

I'll take that team against any non-championship team of my generation.

Yes that team deserved to beat LAL, no that team would not have beaten any of the squads that Jordan beat in his 2nd 3peat.

Obviously impossible to say, but I maintain my stance. The Kings were actually very similar to the Sonics team. Scoring PG, role playing SG, Euro shooting SF, athletic stud PF.

Jazz were a damn good team that Sac battled many times. Took the 98/99 Jazz (basically same lineup as the Finals team the year before) to the limit with no Bibby, no Christie, J-Will at PG and Peja as a minor bench player. Took a Stockton buzzer beater in Game 4 and an overtime win in Game 5 to beat Sac 3-2.

Perhaps a WhatIfSports tourney to decide it all?

Let's not get carried away by trying to put Bibby in the same boat as Payton. Hawkins was significantly better than Christie, Schrempf and Peja were about even. Their only clear advantage was at center.

Wouldn't put Bibby in the same category as Payton; Payton takes that easily, just pointing out vague similarities. Not willing to concede that Hawkins was significantly better than Christie. I'll give Hersey a slight edge in offense, even though Christie was extremely efficient (46/35/85) and basically served as a second PG. But defense is all Doug, and he'd draw Payton in this matchup. I'll take Webber over Kemp -- maybe that's biased -- but Webb was an all-around stud back then. And Vlade over Ervin Johnson/Sam Perkins is a Kings advantage.

A good matchup for sure.

The reason why Kings aren't the best team to never win a title is because their two best players (Webber & Peja) always disappeared in 4th quarter. Peja in general wasn't as good in playoffs as he was in the regular season, and Webber looked a little nervous late in games.
Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:
The reason why Kings aren't the best team to never win a title is because their two best players (Webber & Peja) always disappeared in 4th quarter. Peja in general wasn't as good in playoffs as he was in the regular season, and Webber looked a little nervous late in games.

Peja, I'll give you. He was aggravating in the 4th quarter throughout his career. IMO, the belief that Webber was "nervous" at the end of games was just an extension of the "timeout." He never shied away from taking the big shot. And Bibby became a clutch performer in the 01-02 playoffs and carried it through to the following seasons. We didn't have a Kobe, but we had something.
  • 4ML
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 28,486
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by 49ersMyLife:
The reason why Kings aren't the best team to never win a title is because their two best players (Webber & Peja) always disappeared in 4th quarter. Peja in general wasn't as good in playoffs as he was in the regular season, and Webber looked a little nervous late in games.

Peja, I'll give you. He was aggravating in the 4th quarter throughout his career. IMO, the belief that Webber was "nervous" at the end of games was just an extension of the "timeout." He never shied away from taking the big shot. And Bibby became a clutch performer in the 01-02 playoffs and carried it through to the following seasons. We didn't have a Kobe, but we had something.

Bibby was pretty decent clutch performer for couple seasons, no question about it. Webber may have taken the shots, but he hardly ever made one, at least a notable big shot.

Basically, they didn't have a guy who could close the games consistently. Other than that, they were a pretty formidable team.
  • boast
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 74,708
Originally posted by crabman82:
2000 portland trail blazers, look @ that roster, deep as hell, epic meltdown in game 7 of wcf against lakers tarnished their legacy

photoshopped
Originally posted by SacRock14:
Originally posted by Joecool:

Kings were awesome but just weren't athletic enough which is why the ball always seemed to not bounce in their favor. They also didn't have the "clutch" player as Peja and Webber weren't critical game situation guys.

Not athletic enough? I disagree. That team was lauded for its uptempo, quick play. Chris Webber, pre-injury, was one of the most athletic PF's in NBA history. Doug Christie, Bobby Jackson, Mike Bibby (only his 4th season), Gerald Wallace (if you want to go that far)...all athletic. Athleticism was not why we lost to the Lakers; we had more.

8-man rotation of...
Mike Bibby-Doug Christie-Bobby Jackson
Peja Stojakovic-Chris Webber-Hedo Turkoglu
Vlade Divac-Scot Pollard
with Gerald Wallace.

I'll take that team against any non-championship team of my generation.

The bold were the only athletic players. Mike Bibby was never considered as an athletic player. At that stage of his career, Chris Webber was not very athletic and had lost a lot of his leaping ability and quickness. Peja and Vlade...well.... Hedo was skilled but he was not athletic.

The reason they were so good on offense was because ALL of them can pass and catch the ball very well and almost all of them could shoot. They had issues with higher jumping teams or teams that could rebound well. And Vlade couldn't jump for his life.
We're talking about team, not franchise, right?

The homer in me would like to mention the 2005-2006 San Antonio Spurs.
Originally posted by dobo:
We're talking about team, not franchise, right?

The homer in me would like to mention the 2005-2006 San Antonio Spurs.

Oh yeah! It was the Brent Barry shot that knocked out the Kings and that was the year of the dumb ref that called the And 1 for Dirk on the last play of the game? Man, that call was so lame considering it was minimal contact compared to the majority of the last second shots.

The Spurs would have easily handled MIA in the Finals.

63-19: better record than this year
Originally posted by Joecool:
Originally posted by dobo:
We're talking about team, not franchise, right?

The homer in me would like to mention the 2005-2006 San Antonio Spurs.

Oh yeah! It was the Brent Barry shot that knocked out the Kings and that was the year of the dumb ref that called the And 1 for Dirk on the last play of the game? Man, that call was so lame considering it was minimal contact compared to the majority of the last second shots.

The Spurs would have easily handled MIA in the Finals.

63-19: better record than this year

It probably shouldn't have been called, but more importantly, Manu was stupid for even giving the ref a basis to make the call. The Spurs had a 3 point lead late, and Dirk was going for an easy 2. All this, mind you, after Manu had just given the Spurs their first lead of the night on a clutch 3 pointer.

And then the Spurs had one more possession before the end of regulation, with the game tied. Manu took it himself and settled for a low percentage shot ... while completely missing a wide open Robert Horry in the corner.

That game was the first time I remember muttering to myself, "live by Manu, die by Manu."

edit: and yes, I think the Spurs would have demolished the Suns and the Heat
[ Edited by dobo on Jun 1, 2011 at 9:02 AM ]
I guess the way I interpreted the question is the best "core" that didn't win a title. The 05-06 Spurs were probably the best team that's been mentioned so far, but the key pieces in that group won rings together, so they don't qualify in my mind.
[ Edited by LA9erFan on Jun 1, 2011 at 9:37 AM ]
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
I guess the way I interpreted the question is the best "core" that didn't win a title. The 05-06 Spurs were probably the best team that's been mentioned so far, but the key pieces in that group won rings together, so they don't qualify in my mind.

The more I think about it, the more I think you're probably right. Mainly because of the word "never."
Originally posted by dobo:
Originally posted by LA9erFan:
I guess the way I interpreted the question is the best "core" that didn't win a title. The 05-06 Spurs were probably the best team that's been mentioned so far, but the key pieces in that group won rings together, so they don't qualify in my mind.

The more I think about it, the more I think you're probably right. Mainly because of the word "never."

Whew! Good thing we are 4-0 in NBA Finals.