PDA

View Full Version : Have any other teams in NBA history this talented had so many players made of glass?



Clippersfan86
01-26-2013, 11:08 PM
Okay so... I have a question, especially for multi decade tenured NBA fans. Has any other team with as much depth and talent as the current Clippers had literally half their roster made of glass? It seems like the Clippers constantly have two key players out at a time. Hill, Odom and Billups to start the season.... then it was just Hill and Billups. Now it's CP3 and Billups the last week and a half pretty much. Butler, Bledsoe and Griffin have all played through injuries this year that significantly affected their play for stretches of time.

When this team was constructed the main reason it could never be "too much depth" was because you're guaranteed to have 1-2 guys out at a time. I truly feel that health will be 90 percent of the reason the Clippers either win a title or get booted in the first round. There has yet to be a game where the Clippers have had the full roster. I'm wondering this because I get pissed about losses of course and it gets me thinking about how much we are missing when guys like CP3, Billups, Hill etc sit out games.

I was trying to think back in NBA history and couldn't think of another contending team that was this injury prone.

LakersIn5
01-27-2013, 03:50 AM
2004 lakers
2007 heat

Raps08-09 Champ
01-27-2013, 03:55 AM
Humans are not made of glass.

LakersMaster24
01-27-2013, 04:13 AM
That is the biggest concern I had for the Clippers going forward. CP3's health.

JNoel
01-27-2013, 04:22 AM
I'm trying to remember a song about this.

Iron24th
01-27-2013, 04:44 AM
All NBA teams have to deal with injuries

Tblaze
01-27-2013, 08:23 AM
Ask Minnesota :D

Swashcuff
01-27-2013, 08:59 AM
Don't have to go very far we can simply take a look at the Blazers of not very long ago.

ATL#22
01-27-2013, 09:01 AM
Humans are not made of glass.

Fact

Clippersfan86
01-27-2013, 12:34 PM
Swash Blazers are a good one but never considered a "contender" at least yet. More of a first or second round exit at best team.

Sota4Ever
01-27-2013, 01:01 PM
wow 1-2 injured people a week. You guys got it rough.

THE GIPPER
01-27-2013, 01:18 PM
Swash Blazers are a good one but never considered a "contender" at least yet. More of a first or second round exit at best team.

They would have been if they were healthy. He's referring to the Blazers of a few years ago not the current Blazers btw.

YoungOne
01-27-2013, 01:20 PM
2011 celtics: shaq, JO, perkins, krstic, west, daniels + rondo, garnett at times

heck, all recent celtic years

Chronz
01-27-2013, 01:38 PM
Swash Blazers are a good one but never considered a "contender" at least yet. More of a first or second round exit at best team.

Yea but we talking about perception or reality? Blazers were legit.


But the correct answer to this question were the Tmac-Yao Rockets.

Chronz
01-27-2013, 01:45 PM
wow 1-2 injured people a week. You guys got it rough.

Hes talking about contenders tho. Its one thing when a potential first round team misses the playoffs, but when a potential contender gets hurt, thats really damaging to the game.

Tmac and Yao suffering their injuries deprived us of that competition, the LAL-HOU matchups that should have been back when only 2 teams could hang with LA (POR/HOU)

kenzo400
01-27-2013, 01:50 PM
Okay so... I have a question, especially for multi decade tenured NBA fans. Has any other team with as much depth and talent as the current Clippers had literally half their roster made of glass? It seems like the Clippers constantly have two key players out at a time. Hill, Odom and Billups to start the season.... then it was just Hill and Billups. Now it's CP3 and Billups the last week and a half pretty much. Butler, Bledsoe and Griffin have all played through injuries this year that significantly affected their play for stretches of time.

When this team was constructed the main reason it could never be "too much depth" was because you're guaranteed to have 1-2 guys out at a time. I truly feel that health will be 90 percent of the reason the Clippers either win a title or get booted in the first round. There has yet to be a game where the Clippers have had the full roster. I'm wondering this because I get pissed about losses of course and it gets me thinking about how much we are missing when guys like CP3, Billups, Hill etc sit out games.

I was trying to think back in NBA history and couldn't think of another contending team that was this injury prone.

Hill and Odom are both old, so it makes more sense. Billups has had a long list of injuries in the last 3-4 years, so not a surprise. How is three players so many anyways?

Sota4Ever
01-27-2013, 03:44 PM
Hes talking about contenders tho. Its one thing when a potential first round team misses the playoffs, but when a potential contender gets hurt, thats really damaging to the game.

Tmac and Yao suffering their injuries deprived us of that competition, the LAL-HOU matchups that should have been back when only 2 teams could hang with LA (POR/HOU)

Might just be me and I probably shouldn't be debating this with you but the Timberwolves were suppose to be more than just a potential first round team. We had talent on paper to compete with the top 3-4 teams in the west. Completely healthy team I think we beat the Clips with a completely healthy team but we will never know now.

KnicksorBust
01-27-2013, 04:21 PM
Yea but we talking about perception or reality? Blazers were legit.


But the correct answer to this question were the Tmac-Yao Rockets.

Rockets was my first thought as well.

And I'm sorry but suggesting the Clippers by using guys past their prime players like Lamar Odom, Grant Hill, and Chauncey Billups is just ridiculous. Odom and Hill are the definition of role players at this point and Blake/CP3/DeAndre/Jamal/Caron/etc. have basically played all season.

asandhu23
01-27-2013, 04:23 PM
uh. Did you watch the Warriors' 2008 - 2011? At one point, we got to the point where Curry got fouled out and there was no replacement left on the bench to play the final 20 seconds of the game.

KnicksorBust
01-27-2013, 04:33 PM
uh. Did you watch the Warriors' 2008 - 2011? At one point, we got to the point where Curry got fouled out and there was no replacement left on the bench to play the final 20 seconds of the game.

I believe the OP would argue that the Warriors weren't talented enough to be in this discussion.

Hawkeye15
01-27-2013, 04:35 PM
Coming from a Wolves fan, boo hoo.

KnicksorBust
01-27-2013, 04:40 PM
Again. Are the Wolves currently talented enough to be considered contender? Sure they've had horrible luck but even with Love/Rubio/etc. would they even be a home seed in the playoffs?

Hawkeye15
01-27-2013, 04:45 PM
Again. Are the Wolves currently talented enough to be considered contender? Sure they've had horrible luck but even with Love/Rubio/etc. would they even be a home seed in the playoffs?

I am sorry that my team is excluded from this thread because they are not a true contender, but you have to forgive me not giving a **** about some other team's injury concerns when I am watching my team go down by the nanosecond.

Sota4Ever
01-27-2013, 04:49 PM
Again. Are the Wolves currently talented enough to be considered contender? Sure they've had horrible luck but even with Love/Rubio/etc. would they even be a home seed in the playoffs?

Completely healthy with their real coach?? Absolutely they could be considered contenders.

asandhu23
01-27-2013, 04:54 PM
I believe the OP would argue that the Warriors weren't talented enough to be in this discussion.

actually, they were for a run to the playoffs. Then they got injured and Cohan ownerships decided to hire D League players and tank.

KnicksorBust
01-27-2013, 04:55 PM
Completely healthy with their real coach?? Absolutely they could be considered contenders.

I appreciate your optimism but considering the T-Wolves have had 7 straight losing seasons it just doesn't seem reasonable to put them in a category with the Heat/Thunder/Spurs/etc.

asandhu23
01-27-2013, 04:55 PM
I am sorry that my team is excluded from this thread because they are not a true contender, but you have to forgive me not giving a **** about some other team's injury concerns when I am watching my team go down by the nanosecond.

Indeed. :pity:

$GangGr33n$
01-27-2013, 05:02 PM
Maybe you can say its because of "age" but the Knicks this year. Shump, Camby & STAT to start the year, then throughout the year Melo's missed 6 games, Felton for a while, Sheed maybe for the year

Sota4Ever
01-27-2013, 05:12 PM
I appreciate your optimism but considering the T-Wolves have had 7 straight losing seasons it just doesn't seem reasonable to put them in a category with the Heat/Thunder/Spurs/etc.

So this team is the same as past seasons??

Clippersfan86
01-27-2013, 05:34 PM
They would have been if they were healthy. He's referring to the Blazers of a few years ago not the current Blazers btw.

Yea the Miller, Roy, Batum,Aldridge and Oden Blazers. Chronz.i completely forgot the Rockets, perfect example. Wolves were pretty much a one man show with KG so not counting them. Perennial first round fodder. Celtics of 2011.is another good example though.

Hawkeye15
01-27-2013, 05:37 PM
Yea the Miller, Roy, Batum,Aldridge and Oden Blazers. Chronz.i completely forgot the Rockets, perfect example. Wolves were pretty much a one man show with KG so not counting them. Perennial first round fodder. Celtics of 2011.is another good example though.

i will guarantee every Wolves fan would have loved Cassell not injuring his hip in the beginning of the Laker series. The Wolves were a legit title contender that year.

Clippersfan86
01-27-2013, 05:37 PM
Yea Warriors don't fit the bill with the "We Believe" squad. Im talking about teams with championship level rosters and talent. I doubt the B Roy Blazers, KG Wolves or 07 Warriors players would think about a title. None of the analysts or fans either most likely. Rockets and Celtics are a good example though.

Clippersfan86
01-27-2013, 05:40 PM
i will guarantee every Wolves fan would have loved Cassell not injuring his hip in the beginning of the Laker series. The Wolves were a legit title contender that year.

In what 8 straight seasons you guys were out in the first rounf besides one year? I guess one year we can say it but I remember thinking it would be Spurs or Lakers coming out of the west let alone winning the title.

Hawkeye15
01-27-2013, 05:42 PM
In what 8 straight seasons you guys were out in the first rounf besides one year? I guess one year we can say it but I remember thinking it would be Spurs or Lakers coming out of the west let alone winning the title.

We were the #1 seed, had the MVP, and rolled through Denver, beat Sac in 7, and Cassell hurt his hip early in game 1 of the WCF's. Garnett ended up playing large chunks of PG since we had nobody else.

Chronz
01-27-2013, 09:22 PM
Might just be me and I probably shouldn't be debating this with you but the Timberwolves were suppose to be more than just a potential first round team. We had talent on paper to compete with the top 3-4 teams in the west. Completely healthy team I think we beat the Clips with a completely healthy team but we will never know now.
Yea I dont see a superior roster than any of the top 5 teams. I think its more likely your in that boat with GS or at max the level of play we were at last year.

I mean your core essentially played .500 at full health last year and IIRC it was with a very uninspired SRS, then they made some depth additions. Meanwhile our team made even more signficant additions on top of being the superior team already. Not sure how that paper argument can be calculated.

Chronz
01-27-2013, 09:39 PM
Yea Warriors don't fit the bill with the "We Believe" squad. Im talking about teams with championship level rosters and talent. I doubt the B Roy Blazers, KG Wolves or 07 Warriors players would think about a title. None of the analysts or fans either most likely. Rockets and Celtics are a good example though.

Agreed on the Warriors, that was clearly their ceiling . But whats your gripe with the Blazers? Their SRS was elite the 1 year Oden was healthy.

Sota4Ever
01-27-2013, 09:59 PM
Yea I dont see a superior roster than any of the top 5 teams. I think its more likely your in that boat with GS or at max the level of play we were at last year.

I mean your core essentially played .500 at full health last year and IIRC it was with a very uninspired SRS, then they made some depth additions. Meanwhile our team made even more signficant additions on top of being the superior team already. Not sure how that paper argument can be calculated.

So your saying our moves this off season were all depth additions? So getting a starting shooting guard, solid sixth man shooter, along with a new starting small forward was just about adding depth to our team. I don't follow that. Also your team wasn't superior to our team last year.