PDA

View Full Version : How many championship teams fell apart without its best player



Chronz
08-31-2012, 07:27 PM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would have definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?

Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.

KB-Pau-DH2012
08-31-2012, 07:29 PM
You decided to make this thread before you brought up the same argument in one of those Kobe threads in the NBA Forum, didn't you? :laugh2:

rocket
08-31-2012, 07:36 PM
The Pistons when Chauncey got traded, they were and still are terrible without him.

Chronz
08-31-2012, 07:56 PM
The Pistons when Chauncey got traded, they were and still are terrible without him.

That was years after



You decided to make this thread before you brought up the same argument in one of those Kobe threads in the NBA Forum, didn't you? :laugh2:
Yes

ztilzer31
08-31-2012, 08:07 PM
You decided to make this thread before you brought up the same argument in one of those Kobe threads in the NBA Forum, didn't you? :laugh2:

This guy is a troll. He calls people kids yet he has a smiley face in every single one of his posts. What a chode.

Cal827
08-31-2012, 08:29 PM
:laugh: well this thread is off to an excellent start.

How about Robinson's Spurs? I mean it was one year but they from a perennial contender (consistently a top 2 seed, at worst a 5 seed) to 20-62 in the year without him. If they hadn't lucked out in the draft with Tim Duncan, they likely would have been in the gutter for a few more seasons.

tredigs
08-31-2012, 08:40 PM
:laugh: well this thread is off to an excellent start.

How about Robinson's Spurs? I mean it was one year but they from a perennial contender (consistently a top 2 seed, at worst a 5 seed) to 20-62 in the year without him. If they hadn't lucked out in the draft with Tim Duncan, they likely would have been in the gutter for a few more seasons.

Never made the finals with him though. But if contender is the criteria then obviously in recent memory we have Lebron's Cavs as well.

It's as much a matter of circumstance (happening to be a dominant player in your prime alongside a par to sub-par cast) as it is simply being that dominant player.

tredigs
08-31-2012, 08:43 PM
On a side note, Hakeem had a year in his prime (age 29) where he played the majority of the season and the Rockets missed the playoffs. Slightly winning record, but still a non-playoff birth.

Wes_Craven
08-31-2012, 08:46 PM
On a side note, Hakeem had a year in his prime (age 29) where he played the majority of the season and the Rockets missed the playoffs. Slightly winning record, but still a non-playoff birth.

The topic question is for players that won a championship, not just making it in the Finals(if I'm reading it correctly), so Hakeem would count.

king4day
08-31-2012, 08:58 PM
The Suns were horrid when Nash went to the bench in the early years. When he was hurt the team was waaaaaay below .500

#Shumpert Up
08-31-2012, 08:59 PM
Lebron's cavs, Dwight's Magic lol

Raps18-19 Champ
08-31-2012, 09:02 PM
Cavs-Lebron, Howard-Magic, Hornets-Paul are a few recent.

Ty Fast
08-31-2012, 09:03 PM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would hhtaave definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?

Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.

are you kidding me? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard.

seikou8
08-31-2012, 09:05 PM
are you kidding me? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard.

how so he had a second star and good role players and they went to semi without jordan lead you guessed it Scottie pippen.

rocket
08-31-2012, 09:13 PM
That was years after



Yes

Wtf you talking about years after? He got traded then we got swept in the playoffs and haven't made it sense... lol

PlezPlayDKnicks
08-31-2012, 09:25 PM
Allen iverson.. These teams were built around these guys with role players playin to their stars strengths. (Howard,AI,Lbj) all made it far with their supporting cast. Even Pat Ewing and Reggie. These super teams have become popular again but lets not blame role players for all shortcomings.

And all the above mentioned teams went to the finals

Chronz
08-31-2012, 09:28 PM
That was years after



Yes

Wtf you talking about years after? He got traded then we got swept in the playoffs and haven't made it sense... lol
He was traded years after they won, the Pistons were declining well before that point. I have a hard time believing the Pistons at their peak would be .500 without Chauncey. They won with defense mostly

Chronz
08-31-2012, 09:29 PM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would hhtaave definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?

Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.

are you kidding me? that is the dumbest thing i have ever heard.
Read the post

StinkEye
08-31-2012, 09:50 PM
I remember the Suns sucking without Nash back when he had just returned there, though it was only a few games.

AlmostThere
09-01-2012, 12:47 AM
This guy is a troll. He calls people kids yet he has a smiley face in every single one of his posts. What a chode.

Your a clown. You call Lebron the GOAT when he hasn't even finished his career yet. He has one Post Season Success in 3 finals appearances. 1/3 is no where near as good as 6/6(Jordan) or 5/7(Kobe). Im sorry to say it but Lebron still has a long way to go to be anywhere near the GOAT.

Lakersfan2483
09-01-2012, 03:10 AM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would have definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?


Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.
You also have to consider the fact that the Lakers' frontcourt was trash without Shaq. They had guys like Samaki Walker, Slava Medvdenko, Mark Madsen, etc... filling in as the center when Shaq was hurt. Not to mention Robert Horry was a serviceable power forward, however he was by no means an all star and or someone who was reliable in the post scoring wise. Ditto for Rick Fox. My whole point is, yes they were reliant on Shaq as the team wasn't constructed well frontcourt wise. Shaq was the Lakers' frontcourt and when he went down, Kobe did a masterful job of keeping that team at or above .500 considering who he had to work with and the fact that he didn't have a reliable low post player/scorer.

Chronz
09-01-2012, 03:18 AM
You also have to consider the fact that the Lakers' frontcourt was trash without Shaq. They had guys like Samaki Walker, Slava Medvdenko, Mark Madsen, etc... filling in as the center when Shaq was hurt. Not to mention Robert Horry was a serviceable power forward, however he was by no means an all star and or someone who was reliable in the post scoring wise. Ditto for Rick Fox. My whole point is, yes they were reliant on Shaq as the team wasn't constructed well frontcourt wise. Shaq was the Lakers' frontcourt and when he went down, Kobe did a masterful job of keeping that team at or above .500 considering who he had to work with and the fact that he didn't have a reliable low post player/scorer.

Thats the point, they were a championship team that turned to crap without Shaq. It got worse as they aged tho, I remember when the Lakers started off like 7-13 without Shaq one year, but by then they were no longer championship winners.

Lakersfan2483
09-01-2012, 03:26 AM
Thats the point, they were a championship team that turned to crap without Shaq. It got worse as they aged tho, I remember when the Lakers started off like 7-13 without Shaq one year, but by then they were no longer championship winners.

Yeah I am trying to think of some championship teams that struggled to stay at or above .500 without their best player.

Lakersfan2483
09-01-2012, 03:29 AM
I could imagine the Rockets would have really struggled without Hakeem as they were so heavily reliant on him. Funny thing is, I cannot recall the Dream missing a significant amt. of time during his championship yrs.............. The Spurs had a lot of talent outside of Duncan with Manu, Tony and D. Robinson (apart of the first 2 titles) that they could still perform well without Duncan, however they wouldn't have won rings without him.

Chronz
09-01-2012, 04:39 AM
I could imagine the Rockets would have really struggled without Hakeem as they were so heavily reliant on him. Funny thing is, I cannot recall the Dream missing a significant amt. of time during his championship yrs.............. The Spurs had a lot of talent outside of Duncan with Manu, Tony and D. Robinson (apart of the first 2 titles) that they could still perform well without Duncan, however they wouldn't have won rings without him.

Its only logical that we assume the Rockets wouldnt be much without Dream his first title run. I do remember he missed some time in the early 90's, the team actually did fairly well without him. So much so that some people were actually questioning his importance, it got to the point where he wanted to be traded and would have landed in Miami, but they were unwilling to part with Glen Rice and some other scrub bigman IIRC. Shocking in retrospect but that was before Dream became an offensive machine.

I know Dream missed some time during his 2nd chip, but I dont know what the teams winning% looked like and the Drexler trade kind of messes with the picture.

SINCESTARBURY25
09-01-2012, 12:09 PM
The knicks without Stephon Marbury. Marbs=Championship

akia83
09-01-2012, 01:08 PM
The 2011's Mavs were 55-18 with Dirk and 2-7 without him.

Hellcrooner
09-01-2012, 01:43 PM
90-91 lakers 58 wins
91-92 lakers 43 wins ( similar core).

03-04 lakers 56 wins
04-05 lakers 34 wins ( in this case you would have to split kobe games and non kobe games to see how much of a fall was on shaq, and how much of a fall was on kobe) but the core was different ( not as different as 98 and 99 bulls tough).

Lakersfan2483
09-01-2012, 11:01 PM
90-91 lakers 58 wins
91-92 lakers 43 wins ( similar core).

03-04 lakers 56 wins
04-05 lakers 34 wins ( in this case you would have to split kobe games and non kobe games to see how much of a fall was on shaq, and how much of a fall was on kobe) but the core was different ( not as different as 98 and 99 bulls tough).

In O4-05 the Lakers lost more than Shaq, although he was the "major" piece that was moved. They lost K. Malone, D. Fisher, G. Payton. It was a major roster overhaul.

Lakersfan2483
09-01-2012, 11:03 PM
Its only logical that we assume the Rockets wouldnt be much without Dream his first title run. I do remember he missed some time in the early 90's, the team actually did fairly well without him. So much so that some people were actually questioning his importance, it got to the point where he wanted to be traded and would have landed in Miami, but they were unwilling to part with Glen Rice and some other scrub bigman IIRC. Shocking in retrospect but that was before Dream became an offensive machine.

I know Dream missed some time during his 2nd chip, but I dont know what the teams winning% looked like and the Drexler trade kind of messes with the picture.

Yeah I am going to have to look into the Rockets' winning pct. without Olajuwon during his 2nd championship run.

JordansBulls
09-02-2012, 09:54 AM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would have definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?

Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.

Bulls in 1998 to 1999 once MJ left. Went from the best record to one of the worst records as he was the only allstar on the 1998 team.

akia83
09-02-2012, 12:06 PM
Bulls in 1998 to 1999 once MJ left. Went from the best record to one of the worst records as he was the only allstar on the 1998 team.

True, and Charlotte in 2002-2003 once Baron Davis left, went from 44 wins to 0 win, as he was the only allstar on the 2002 team.

It might be because every other player left Charlotte to NOLA, but I guess you don't care, since they weren't all stars :facepalm:

Hellcrooner
09-02-2012, 02:27 PM
Bulls in 1998 to 1999 once MJ left. Went from the best record to one of the worst records as he was the only allstar on the 1998 team.

blah blah blah.

Wheter if they were allstars or not, the team lost their 6 or 7 best players.

Swashcuff
09-02-2012, 02:41 PM
Rick Barry's Warriors

dh144498
09-04-2012, 11:25 AM
Lebron's cleveland for sure.

RaiderLakersA's
09-04-2012, 11:46 AM
How often is a championship team so reliant on 1 player that they can barely tread .500 without him?

I dont think the Bulls were that reliant on MJ, they only lost 2 less games the year he retired. Thats part of what makes the team so dominant and comparable to any other IMO, it wasnt just MJ.

Bron joined the Heat so he wouldnt have to carry the burden himself and Im sure if you take him off that Wade and Bosh could pick up the slack. His Cleveland teams are another story, had they won a chip I would have definitely included them here.

What about Duncan's Spurs? Hakeems Rockets? Dirks Mavericks?

Kobe was rarely hurt so we dont have much to work with but I recall a stretch where he missed a few games and the Lakers beat a hot Utah team and maybe a few others. Young Kobe however was injured quite abit, and overall the Lakers were able to maintain a strong winning% without him, but you take those exact same teammates, give them Kobe but you take away Shaq, they were lucky to be .500, so Shaq definitely qualifies IMO. The Lakers were nothing without him.

That's a long way to go just to say that the Lakers were crappy the first season or so without Shaq (and Phil Jackson), don't you think? :D

Chronz
09-04-2012, 11:59 AM
Bulls in 1998 to 1999 once MJ left. Went from the best record to one of the worst records as he was the only allstar on the 1998 team.

Right, MJ was the only loss. Meanwhile when Bron left Cleveland, they lost so much more than Bron. :rolleyes:

Chronz
09-04-2012, 12:00 PM
That's a long way to go just to say that the Lakers were crappy the first season or so without Shaq (and Phil Jackson), don't you think? :D

Im not talking about that year. You give the Lakers Phil and Kobe but no Shaq, were they even .500 in the games he missed? I remember them winning at a high rate even when Kobe sat so long as Shaq was around. Remember that year Kobe refused to play team ball, then got injured and saw how good the team did without him, he came back with a different mindset.

Giraffes Rule
09-04-2012, 01:25 PM
:laugh: well this thread is off to an excellent start.

How about Robinson's Spurs? I mean it was one year but they from a perennial contender (consistently a top 2 seed, at worst a 5 seed) to 20-62 in the year without him. If they hadn't lucked out in the draft with Tim Duncan, they likely would have been in the gutter for a few more seasons.

To be fair they also lost Sean Elliot to injury for much of that year too, then maybe tanked just a little.