PDA

View Full Version : so where do you rank the 2002 Kings?



MTar786
09-04-2015, 08:43 PM
hey guys, So with shaq week going on I got the re watch game 4 of the 02 kings lakers series. It was a game i got to witness live at the staples center. Probably the most amazing basketball moment i ever got to be a part of. With that said, The kings in 02 were unbelievable and if they had a ring now people would have remembered them.. coming from a laker fan I got to hand it to them.. IMO that team could have beaten plenty of the teams that won championship. Please dont turn this into a lakers vs kings thread or who won the series between lakers and kings argument. I just want to hear what everyone thinks of that squad now days.

Tony_Starks
09-04-2015, 08:47 PM
Greatest squad to never win a title. Point blank period.

MTar786
09-04-2015, 08:55 PM
Greatest squad to never win a title. Point blank period.

i agree

kingsdelez24
09-04-2015, 09:04 PM
Call disparities in game 6 aside, the team choked in game 7 when they still had a chance.

They easily could have beaten those Nets, and likely are the best team never to win a title

FlashBolt
09-04-2015, 10:30 PM
They would have destroyed the Nets but we all know the refs helped the Lakers. Game 7 was just bad and it felt as if Kings lost hope after seeing how blatant the refs were in helping the Lakers in game 6. I still think they should strip that championship. How do you award a team the ring when it was factually proven that they were given favorable treatment? I don't even want to say they are the greatest team that never won... cause truthfully, they never lost either.

Arch Stanton
09-04-2015, 10:47 PM
Greatest Kings team ever. I don't think they are the greatest team to not win a title though.

PowerHouse
09-04-2015, 11:01 PM
Greatest squad to never win a title. Point blank period.

Better than Knicks of 92'-95'? Or the 88' Mavricks?

Cal827
09-04-2015, 11:06 PM
Better than Knicks of 92'-95'? Or the 88' Mavricks?

Oh come on. We all know that the Knicks had no real competition in the East from 92-95.

Chronz
09-04-2015, 11:06 PM
They would have destroyed the Nets but we all know the refs helped the Lakers. Game 7 was just bad and it felt as if Kings lost hope after seeing how blatant the refs were in helping the Lakers in game 6. I still think they should strip that championship. How do you award a team the ring when it was factually proven that they were given favorable treatment? I don't even want to say they are the greatest team that never won... cause truthfully, they never lost either.
Cuz it's factually proven that the refs gave them unfavorable treatment in the earlier defeats

Cal827
09-04-2015, 11:07 PM
Greatest squad to never win a title. Point blank period.

Pretty much this.


Also to be fair on the Nets comments, I think pretty much 4 or 5 teams in the West would've easily won against them. The East is just plain terrible :laugh2:

PowerHouse
09-04-2015, 11:36 PM
I think the 2000 Blazers may have been a little tougher now that I think about it. If it wasnt for a huge collapse in the last 6 minutes of the 4th quarter of game 7 they would've been champions.

BKdoubleStacker
09-04-2015, 11:55 PM
I miss the rivalry with the Sacramento "queens"

Peja was deadly and Webber was a boss

slaker619
09-05-2015, 12:25 AM
They were robbed of a title

ghettosean
09-05-2015, 12:32 AM
Greatest Kings team ever. I don't think they are the greatest team to not win a title though.

I agree with this

CousinsEvansDUO
09-05-2015, 12:48 AM
That team would beat 14-15 warriors in the finals. In 5 games.

Arch Stanton
09-05-2015, 12:58 AM
That team would beat 14-15 warriors in the finals. In 5 games.

No they wouldn't.

FlashBolt
09-05-2015, 01:01 AM
Cuz it's factually proven that the refs gave them unfavorable treatment in the earlier defeats

Would like some links. They only admitted to the game 6 fixing.

JLynn943
09-05-2015, 01:12 AM
Certainly one of the best teams, if not the best, to never win a title. I don't like to think about it.

CousinsEvansDUO
09-05-2015, 01:13 AM
Yeah they would, they would shut down their perimeter players..webber would eat dray mind for lunch, and divac was a better version of today's Marc gasol.

Arch Stanton
09-05-2015, 01:48 AM
Yeah they would, they would shut down their perimeter players..webber would eat dray mind for lunch, and divac was a better version of today's Marc gasol.

5 games? Two different eras.... Do hand check fouls exist in this match up?

MTar786
09-05-2015, 06:14 AM
I think the 2000 Blazers may have been a little tougher now that I think about it. If it wasnt for a huge collapse in the last 6 minutes of the 4th quarter of game 7 they would've been champions.

oh man i completely forgot! That team was insane and had to be one of the deepest teams ever. I agree, tough call.. but i still think the kings were slightly better

c.c.
09-05-2015, 06:35 AM
Better than Knicks of 92'-95'? Or the 88' Mavricks?

1997 and 1998 Utah Jazz

MTar786
09-05-2015, 07:52 AM
Would like some links. They only admitted to the game 6 fixing.

i dont know what he's talking about either.

R. Johnson#3
09-05-2015, 08:21 AM
Greatest squad to never win a title. Point blank period.

+1

Their starting 5 were ridiculously well balanced.

Clippersfan86
09-05-2015, 10:08 AM
96 Sonics won 64 games and pushed the Bulls to 6 games in the finals. 98 Jazz had a similar fate. But yea Kings are the most TALENTED team to not win the title.

kingsdelez24
09-05-2015, 12:17 PM
Would like some links. They only admitted to the game 6 fixing.

i dont know what he's talking about either.

I thib he's trying tk refer to call disparity before game six which was allegedly in the kings favor

However, even if that's true, nobody thinks to bring it up until game 6 is mentioned. That was the worst officiating ever, period. If only they didn't choke in game 7, the kings would have had em

Hawkeye15
09-05-2015, 02:25 PM
I think we can all agree they were one of the best teams that didn't win the finals in their year. Great team, that unfortunately ran into a Shaq-Kobe-Phil Lakers squad, and had some controversial calls go against them. But they did have a chance in game 7, and didn't win. Can't pin it all on the refs.

FlashBolt
09-05-2015, 02:39 PM
I thib he's trying tk refer to call disparity before game six which was allegedly in the kings favor

However, even if that's true, nobody thinks to bring it up until game 6 is mentioned. That was the worst officiating ever, period. If only they didn't choke in game 7, the kings would have had em

It doesn't matter about what happened before game six considering none of that was proven. It was only up to game six in which the ref admitted that he wanted to drag it to seven games and orchestrated it as so. If I can recall, he was only charged for game 6 so that is definitively true. What happened before wasn't in question.


I think we can all agree they were one of the best teams that didn't win the finals in their year. Great team, that unfortunately ran into a Shaq-Kobe-Phil Lakers squad, and had some controversial calls go against them. But they did have a chance in game 7, and didn't win. Can't pin it all on the refs.

I disagree. They probably felt cheated after that game 6 nonsense. It just made no sense from any perspective. Remember, they didn't lose game 6 fairly so coming into game 7, they probably had a different approach.

Tony_Starks
09-05-2015, 06:00 PM
If you have a game 7 on your home floor, that goes to overtime at that, and still can't get it done?

I'm sorry, you don't deserve it.

The refs didn't make Peja airball that wide open 3 to win the title.

FlashBolt
09-05-2015, 07:25 PM
If you have a game 7 on your home floor, that goes to overtime at that, and still can't get it done?

I'm sorry, you don't deserve it.

The refs didn't make Peja airball that wide open 3 to win the title.

But the Lakers who won a fixed game 6 deserved to win... makes sense!

Tony_Starks
09-05-2015, 07:33 PM
If you have a game 7 on your home floor, that goes to overtime at that, and still can't get it done?

I'm sorry, you don't deserve it.

The refs didn't make Peja airball that wide open 3 to win the title.

But the Lakers who won a fixed game 6 deserved to win... makes sense!

Game 6 was over sir. In the playoffs every game is independent.

It appears you are of the opinion that if you were cheated in game 6 you might as well cave game 7. I'd hate to have you as my coach.

Did you even watch game 7 or just research it btw?

I watched. Kings had it. In the bag. They choked.

Game over.

FlashBolt
09-05-2015, 07:37 PM
Game 6 was over sir. In the playoffs every game is independent.

It appears you are of the opinion that if you were cheated in game 6 you might as well cave game 7. I'd hate to have you as my coach.

Did you even watch game 7 or just research it btw?

I watched. Kings had it. In the bag. They choked.

Game over.

There would be no game 7 if refs were officiating game 6 fairly.. understand? I know you want to ignore this piece of evidence because then it means your boytoy hero in Kobe would actually have FOUR rings.

Tony_Starks
09-05-2015, 07:50 PM
Game 6 was over sir. In the playoffs every game is independent.

It appears you are of the opinion that if you were cheated in game 6 you might as well cave game 7. I'd hate to have you as my coach.

Did you even watch game 7 or just research it btw?

I watched. Kings had it. In the bag. They choked.

Game over.

There would be no game 7 if refs were officiating game 6 fairly.. understand? I know you want to ignore this piece of evidence because then it means your boytoy hero in Kobe would actually have FOUR rings.

AND there it is! Took you long enough to get where we all knew this was going.

Good job and stay salty.


At any rate that Kings team was special. Even as a rival you couldn't help but watch and admire how they moved the rock.

Chronz
09-05-2015, 11:34 PM
Would like some links. They only admitted to the game 6 fixing.

No, I dont think thats true. At all

basch152
09-06-2015, 12:28 AM
I'm sorry, but someone that says they didnt dear it because they didn't win game 7 after being cheated on game 6 is ****ing ********.

You're basically saying if the other team is spotted a game in the series you should still just put it off anyways. Ridiculous.

ManningToTyree
09-06-2015, 09:55 AM
Doesn't Change the fact that They still had a chance to win it. One of the most talented teams to not reach the finals. I won't go any further then that

FlashBolt
09-06-2015, 02:06 PM
No, I dont think thats true. At all

Any links? That's what it says pretty much in every source I'm looking at.


I'm sorry, but someone that says they didnt dear it because they didn't win game 7 after being cheated on game 6 is ****ing ********.

You're basically saying if the other team is spotted a game in the series you should still just put it off anyways. Ridiculous.

I know. I think he's just upset that Kobe really should have four rings.

MTar786
09-07-2015, 02:17 AM
kobe has as many rings as he should. he has 5 because he deserves 5

Chronz
09-07-2015, 12:51 PM
Any links? That's what it says pretty much in every source I'm looking at.



I know. I think he's just upset that Kobe really should have four rings.
Yeah you're really misinformed. Feel free
To post whatever because you're clearly taking things out of context.

Chronz
09-07-2015, 02:32 PM
I'm sorry, but someone that says they didnt dear it because they didn't win game 7 after being cheated on game 6 is ****ing ********.

You're basically saying if the other team is spotted a game in the series you should still just put it off anyways. Ridiculous.
You can play this one of two ways. Either there was a conspiracy to stretch this series to 7 and reward the rightful team or you can say it was a horribly officiated series all around. Either way, the kings still had the advantage at the line. In a better officiated series the lakers end them much sooner

Tony_Starks
09-07-2015, 02:36 PM
Doesn't Change the fact that They still had a chance to win it. One of the most talented teams to not reach the finals. I won't go any further then that


I really wonder how many rings they would've got had they won and kept it together. To that point management had been really serious about giving them a competitive team like 10 players deep. After that loss they started tightening their belts and slowly letting all those "glue guys" go, putting more of a load on C Webb/ Bibby.

I remember when the Kings "bench mob" would come in, Bobby Jackson..Hedo....Pollard and even sometimes young Gerald Wallace it was like damn this team is scary!

Sactown
09-07-2015, 07:31 PM
I really wonder how many rings they would've got had they won and kept it together. To that point management had been really serious about giving them a competitive team like 10 players deep. After that loss they started tightening their belts and slowly letting all those "glue guys" go, putting more of a load on C Webb/ Bibby.

I remember when the Kings "bench mob" would come in, Bobby Jackson..Hedo....Pollard and even sometimes young Gerald Wallace it was like damn this team is scary!

Make no mistake injuries derailed this team,

Webber blew out his knee and Mike Bibby broke his foot in 2003 because of a camera man on the baseline during practice. Vlade was getting older , Peja had a few more good years before he broke his hand and never was the same. Doug Christie was getting older and was more of a glue guy and didn't have a place for the future . The team needed to rebuild and I wish they actually broke it part earlier x

basch152
09-07-2015, 07:55 PM
You can play this one of two ways. Either there was a conspiracy to stretch this series to 7 and reward the rightful team or you can say it was a horribly officiated series all around. Either way, the kings still had the advantage at the line. In a better officiated series the lakers end them much sooner

Its amazing how delusional yoy are.

It's not like the lakers were some pushover team, thry were a great team, you cant just spot them a game and be like "yep, other team should have pulled it off anyways."

If Sacramento was just spotted a game like that the series wouldn't even have made it to game 6.

andy2518
09-07-2015, 08:20 PM
There would be no game 7 if refs were officiating game 6 fairly.. understand? I know you want to ignore this piece of evidence because then it means your boytoy hero in Kobe would actually have FOUR rings.

Would you say that they officiated game 3 fairly as well?

andy2518
09-07-2015, 08:21 PM
You can play this one of two ways. Either there was a conspiracy to stretch this series to 7 and reward the rightful team or you can say it was a horribly officiated series all around. Either way, the kings still had the advantage at the line. In a better officiated series the lakers end them much sooner

I agree. Funny that most people call you a Laker hater too.

Chronz
09-07-2015, 08:37 PM
Its amazing how delusional yoy are.

It's not like the lakers were some pushover team, thry were a great team, you cant just spot them a game and be like "yep, other team should have pulled it off anyways."

If Sacramento was just spotted a game like that the series wouldn't even have made it to game 6.

They only got to7 because they were given the love. No amount of straws could make me believe I'm delusional

Chronz
09-07-2015, 08:40 PM
I agree. Funny that most people call you a Laker hater too.
I live in la. Being a clips fan doesn't mean i hate the overpriced show. Lakers robbed Detroit in the 80s tho

Lloyd Christmas
09-07-2015, 08:48 PM
I still can't believe that Lakers team with Payton and Malone lost in the finals.

andy2518
09-07-2015, 09:07 PM
I live in la. Being a clips fan doesn't mean i hate the overpriced show. Lakers robbed Detroit in the 80s tho

Ya, that Laimbeer foul on Kareem was bogus. Happens all the time though. Scottie got screwed by a bogus Hue Hollins whistle at the end of a crucial game five, and Dirk got screwed by a phantom foul on D-Wade at the end of a crucial game five. Can't blame an entire series on one call though no matter how crucial a time it was. Hundreds of possessions throughout 5-7 games can't be attributed to a single call. A series must be looked at throughout it's entirety. Which is exactly the point you are making in this thread by saying that the horrible officiating against the Kings can't be justified as them getting robbed based on just one quarter of playoff basketball. Which is even more than just a single call.

YAALREADYKNO
09-08-2015, 09:46 AM
2/20 from the 3pt line
16/30 from the FT line
yeah C-Webb and the kings choked away game 7. It's not like they had to go into LA for a game 7 after a controversial game 6. They had the deciding game on their home floor and had every opportunity to win that game. If peja didn't choose to go 0/6 from 3 and if the kings would've made one more FT in regulation its a whole new conversation.

JLynn943
09-08-2015, 10:21 AM
No, I dont think thats true. At all

By all means - please, back this up. I've certainly never read anything corroborating what you're saying. What you think doesn't matter.

Tony_Starks
09-08-2015, 11:14 AM
2/20 from the 3pt line
16/30 from the FT line
yeah C-Webb and the kings choked away game 7. It's not like they had to go into LA for a game 7 after a controversial game 6. They had the deciding game on their home floor and had every opportunity to win that game. If peja didn't choose to go 0/6 from 3 and if the kings would've made one more FT in regulation its a whole new conversation.


Don't even waste your time explaining the reality that actually occurred. If people are that bitter that the Lakers won there's no amount of facts that will wise them up.

The funny part is it isn't even the Kings fans that are crying, they actually are aware of what happened. It's random haters for no reason haters.

Chronz
09-08-2015, 11:31 AM
By all means - please, back this up. I've certainly never read anything corroborating what you're saying. What you think doesn't matter.

Hate to burst your bubble but nobody I've quoted has actually provided anything more than opinions.

YAALREADYKNO
09-08-2015, 02:13 PM
Don't even waste your time explaining the reality that actually occurred. If people are that bitter that the Lakers won there's no amount of facts that will wise them up.

The funny part is it isn't even the Kings fans that are crying, they actually are aware of what happened. It's random haters for no reason haters.

It's the fact that it's shaq Kobe and the lakers lol more so kobe and the lakers is to why they hate lmao

YAALREADYKNO
09-08-2015, 02:21 PM
Don't even waste your time explaining the reality that actually occurred. If people are that bitter that the Lakers won there's no amount of facts that will wise them up.

The funny part is it isn't even the Kings fans that are crying, they actually are aware of what happened. It's random haters for no reason haters.

It's the fact that it's shaq Kobe and the lakers lol more so kobe and the lakers is to why they hate lmao

Tony_Starks
09-08-2015, 02:31 PM
Don't even waste your time explaining the reality that actually occurred. If people are that bitter that the Lakers won there's no amount of facts that will wise them up.

The funny part is it isn't even the Kings fans that are crying, they actually are aware of what happened. It's random haters for no reason haters.

It's the fact that it's shaq Kobe and the lakers lol more so kobe and the lakers is to why they hate lmao


Exactly. Dudes trolling with "you mad Kobe should've had FOUR rings!" Like really? That's your unrelated topic go to?

The way they randomly throw Kobe's name in threads that have nothing to do with him I would swear he must've blew them off for a autograph like Stan....

PowerHouse
09-08-2015, 02:58 PM
I live in la. Being a clips fan doesn't mean i hate the overpriced show. Lakers robbed Detroit in the 80s tho

Since they got their payback not only once but twice ('89, '04) Im sure Detroit and their fans are totally cool with how things eventually turned out.

Tony_Starks
09-08-2015, 03:25 PM
I really wonder how many rings they would've got had they won and kept it together. To that point management had been really serious about giving them a competitive team like 10 players deep. After that loss they started tightening their belts and slowly letting all those "glue guys" go, putting more of a load on C Webb/ Bibby.

I remember when the Kings "bench mob" would come in, Bobby Jackson..Hedo....Pollard and even sometimes young Gerald Wallace it was like damn this team is scary!

Make no mistake injuries derailed this team,

Webber blew out his knee and Mike Bibby broke his foot in 2003 because of a camera man on the baseline during practice. Vlade was getting older , Peja had a few more good years before he broke his hand and never was the same. Doug Christie was getting older and was more of a glue guy and didn't have a place for the future . The team needed to rebuild and I wish they actually broke it part earlier x

True. I hated to see Webb go down, that completely altered things. I had him over Duncan and KG personally but that killed the chance to show it.

I actually liked most of the guys on the Kings roster, with the exception of Bibby who just a jerk. Still had to respect him tho.

phantasyyy
09-08-2015, 04:12 PM
Thread prompted me to read this article:

http://82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm

pretty good breakdown of the officiating and calls that were made throughout the game.

Shows a slight preference to the Lakers, but overall the writer states it wasn't enough to convince him that the game was given any indication to favor the lakers.

Pretty good read, and it breaks down all the calls within the last 5 minutes, or another page that highlights all the plays itself.

JLynn943
09-08-2015, 04:46 PM
Hate to burst your bubble but nobody I've quoted has actually provided anything more than opinions.

What, that game 6 was fixed? I mean, that was the game Donaghy specifically pointed out as being fixed. Whether or not you trust him I guess is debatable, but it's not my or anyone else's opinion that he said it.

hidalgo
09-15-2015, 12:55 AM
i know they were good, but calling them the best to never win it seems ridiculous, & far over reaching just to make the lakers look better. think of all the Lakers/Celtics teams in the 80s who didn't win it all. the 88 pistons, the 1990 Bulls, 91 Lakers, 91 pistons, 92 knicks, 93 suns, rockets, sonics, knicks, 94 knicks, 95 magic, spurs or pacers, 96 sonics, 97 rockets, 97 jazz, 98 pacers, 98 jazz, 2000 blazers, 2005 pistons, 2013 spurs, 2014 heat etc

not to mention the 60s & 70s teams, & others i forgot. far too many great teams to just proclaim 2002 kings the best. absurd really. so many of the teams i named would beat 2002 kings imo. they didn't have a closer ala MJ Isiah Bird Magic R Miller etc, & seemed to get tight in crunch time(airballs from Peja, nervous Webber, silly tap out to Horry for the gw 3 by Divac) they got rattled & weren't mentally tough compaired to a lot of other teams who lost in nba history

the 2002 lakers were vulnerable & ripe to be dethroned, but the KIngs always choked it away. i remember rooting for Sac like crazy, but deep down knew they'd probably blow it because they weren't mentally tough enough & had no closer. an excellent team, but beyond overrated & it insults a fcck ton of teams who never won that were better than them imo

PowerHouse
09-15-2015, 02:22 AM
i know they were good, but calling them the best to never win it seems ridiculous, & far over reaching just to make the lakers look better. think of all the Lakers/Celtics teams in the 80s who didn't win it all. the 88 pistons, the 1990 Bulls, 91 Lakers, 91 pistons, 92 knicks, 93 suns, rockets, sonics, knicks, 94 knicks, 95 magic, spurs or pacers, 96 sonics, 97 rockets, 97 jazz, 98 pacers, 98 jazz, 2000 blazers, 2005 pistons, 2013 spurs, 2014 heat etc


Im pretty sure he's talking about teams who's core group never won a title. That means half your list wouldnt qualify. The Jazz, Pacers, Knicks, 96 Sonics, 95 Magic, 93 Suns and 2000 Blazers teams are the ones that qualify for the debate. Personally I think only the 2000 Blazers would beat the Kings in a 7 game series.

Chronz
09-15-2015, 03:33 AM
Im pretty sure he's talking about teams who's core group never won a title. That means half your list wouldnt qualify. The Jazz, Pacers, Knicks, 96 Sonics, 95 Magic, 93 Suns and 2000 Blazers teams are the ones that qualify for the debate. Personally I think only the 2000 Blazers would beat the Kings in a 7 game series.

well said

Iron24th
09-15-2015, 07:35 AM
They would have destroyed the Nets but we all know the refs helped the Lakers. Game 7 was just bad and it felt as if Kings lost hope after seeing how blatant the refs were in helping the Lakers in game 6. I still think they should strip that championship. How do you award a team the ring when it was factually proven that they were given favorable treatment? I don't even want to say they are the greatest team that never won... cause truthfully, they never lost either.

Like there was no other team who was given favorable treatment in NBA history :facepalm:

valade16
09-15-2015, 08:48 AM
Im pretty sure he's talking about teams who's core group never won a title. That means half your list wouldnt qualify. The Jazz, Pacers, Knicks, 96 Sonics, 95 Magic, 93 Suns and 2000 Blazers teams are the ones that qualify for the debate. Personally I think only the 2000 Blazers would beat the Kings in a 7 game series.

I was actually thinking of starting an 8 team playoff tournament to vote on here of the best teams to never win a title (restricted to after 1990) (essentially like their playoffs to give one of them a title).

The 8 teams I were thinking about were the 93 Suns, 94 Knicks, 95 Magic, 96 Sonics, 99 Pacers, 00 Blazers, 02 Kings, and the 12 Thunder.

Can anyone think of a more deserving team than those listed?

valade16
09-15-2015, 08:54 AM
Thread prompted me to read this article:

http://82games.com/lakerskingsgame6.htm

pretty good breakdown of the officiating and calls that were made throughout the game.

Shows a slight preference to the Lakers, but overall the writer states it wasn't enough to convince him that the game was given any indication to favor the lakers.

Pretty good read, and it breaks down all the calls within the last 5 minutes, or another page that highlights all the plays itself.

Not the best argument for the Lakers there. The slight edge to the Lakers is in total calls (55 to 54), but if you look at just the ones he considered dubious or very dubious it's a 7-2 edge for the Lakers.

kingsdelez24
09-15-2015, 02:27 PM
Bibby was our closer, and he was damn good at it before he (and the team) regressed

BigBuckley
09-15-2015, 03:28 PM
I don't know if they were the best team to never win a title (cause that involves teams across different era playing each other in some kind of time travelling duel) but if they had beaten the Lakers then for sure they would have won a title. The Nets weren't gonna stop Sactown that year.

PowerHouse
09-15-2015, 07:50 PM
I was actually thinking of starting an 8 team playoff tournament to vote on here of the best teams to never win a title (restricted to after 1990) (essentially like their playoffs to give one of them a title).

The 8 teams I were thinking about were the 93 Suns, 94 Knicks, 95 Magic, 96 Sonics, 99 Pacers, 00 Blazers, 02 Kings, and the 12 Thunder.

Can anyone think of a more deserving team than those listed?

You should roll with that idea. But I think the '97 or '98 Jazz gotta be in there somewhere. Early 90s Blazers might need consideration as well.

valade16
09-16-2015, 08:57 AM
You should roll with that idea. But I think the '97 or '98 Jazz gotta be in there somewhere. Early 90s Blazers might need consideration as well.

I have them on my list here I forgot to put them up there (don't know how).

Tony_Starks
09-16-2015, 10:25 AM
I was watching the '03 Kings that next year. It's a shame CWebb went down I think that was the year for redemption. Kobe and Shaq finally out of the way, that experience and heartbreak from last year still fresh, all the stars were aligned.

i really believe they win it all if Webber doesn't go down against Dallas.

KingPosey
09-16-2015, 10:45 AM
i know they were good, but calling them the best to never win it seems ridiculous, & far over reaching just to make the lakers look better. think of all the Lakers/Celtics teams in the 80s who didn't win it all. the 88 pistons, the 1990 Bulls, 91 Lakers, 91 pistons, 92 knicks, 93 suns, rockets, sonics, knicks, 94 knicks, 95 magic, spurs or pacers, 96 sonics, 97 rockets, 97 jazz, 98 pacers, 98 jazz, 2000 blazers, 2005 pistons, 2013 spurs, 2014 heat etc

not to mention the 60s & 70s teams, & others i forgot. far too many great teams to just proclaim 2002 kings the best. absurd really. so many of the teams i named would beat 2002 kings imo. they didn't have a closer ala MJ Isiah Bird Magic R Miller etc, & seemed to get tight in crunch time(airballs from Peja, nervous Webber, silly tap out to Horry for the gw 3 by Divac) they got rattled & weren't mentally tough compaired to a lot of other teams who lost in nba history

the 2002 lakers were vulnerable & ripe to be dethroned, but the KIngs always choked it away. i remember rooting for Sac like crazy, but deep down knew they'd probably blow it because they weren't mentally tough enough & had no closer. an excellent team, but beyond overrated & it insults a fcck ton of teams who never won that were better than them imo

They would have SMASHED that heat team. And forget about any team in the 60s or 70s that's ridiculous. They legitimately have an argument as the best to never win it. The only teams I'm not putting my money up against are those early Jordan teams in the 90s.

They would have murdered a ton of those teams you just mentioned though

MonroeFAN
09-16-2015, 11:05 AM
Woah, best team to never win a title? Pretty bold statement there. I'm not even convinced they're better than the Nash led PHX squads, or IND 03/04 pre-brawl.

That team was mentally weak from top to bottom, coach included.

valade16
09-16-2015, 12:18 PM
Woah, best team to never win a title? Pretty bold statement there. I'm not even convinced they're better than the Nash led PHX squads, or IND 03/04 pre-brawl.

That team was mentally weak from top to bottom, coach included.

If that's the case it speaks to their talent level that a mentally weak team took one of the best teams ever to Game 7 under dubious circumstances.

MonroeFAN
09-16-2015, 12:20 PM
Another pretty extreme assumption.

We beat that "one of the greatest teams ever" like they stole something a few seasons later.

Hawkeye15
09-16-2015, 01:43 PM
I was watching the '03 Kings that next year. It's a shame CWebb went down I think that was the year for redemption. Kobe and Shaq finally out of the way, that experience and heartbreak from last year still fresh, all the stars were aligned.

i really believe they win it all if Webber doesn't go down against Dallas.

I think they have a good shot if they get past the Wolves in 04' too. Lakers were dysfunctional, and a Cassell injury opened up that series. But, we will never know..

Chronz
09-16-2015, 02:04 PM
I think they have a good shot if they get past the Wolves in 04' too. Lakers were dysfunctional, and a Cassell injury opened up that series. But, we will never know..
You mean the 04 kings had Webber not gone down in 03?

MonroeFAN
09-16-2015, 02:17 PM
I think they have a good shot if they get past the Wolves in 04' too. Lakers were dysfunctional, and a Cassell injury opened up that series. But, we will never know..

I love how the Lakers weren't dysfunctional when they were walking leisurely through the WC, but after they got their *** kicked in the Finals they were dysfunctional.

MTar786
09-16-2015, 06:03 PM
I love how the Lakers weren't dysfunctional when they were walking leisurely through the WC, but after they got their *** kicked in the Finals they were dysfunctional.

thats because it only started affecting the lakers when the finals started. shaq and kobe were not passing the ball to eachother at all. and kobe broke almost every play to shoot it up himself. I personally always thought it was because kobe wanted finals mvp for once and phil wanted the ball to go into shaq every play (which was the right thing to do)

MonroeFAN
09-17-2015, 05:53 AM
:'-( I'm sorry you couldn't pass and do whatever you wanted against one of the best defenses of all time.

Next time someone responds to one of my comments, come correct. No one cares about this Hollywood willy-nilly BS. A magic spell was cast over the 2003-04 lakers that only their fans could see. Perfect explanation

The answer you're looking for professor basketball, is that the WC was hilariously over rated (You had a 50 year old Sam Cassell and Karl Malone making waves among the top teams) and the Lakers were arrogant as crap and got whooped on. Period.

kingsdelez24
09-17-2015, 02:26 PM
I think they have a good shot if they get past the Wolves in 04' too. Lakers were dysfunctional, and a Cassell injury opened up that series. But, we will never know..
You mean the 04 kings had Webber not gone down in 03?


You mean if Webber had never come back. The kings were at the top of the league without him and Peja was an MVP candidate. They regressed when Webber slowed them down

kingsdelez24
09-17-2015, 02:50 PM
.

Edit: posted in wrong thread

Chronz
09-17-2015, 02:58 PM
You mean if Webber had never come back. The kings were at the top of the league without him and Peja was an MVP candidate. They regressed when Webber slowed them down

Or that too. But Webber coming back isn't worse than Webber getting injured, and thats what those 2 were talking about. I think if Webber never gets hurt and the Kings still make those additions, they're looking at a dominant 2 year window IMO.

As for them had Webber never came back, yeah they were an elite team but Im not so sure they're good enough to win without him at full strength. I feel like Vlade was washed up as a playoff performer by then. Good enough to play sparingly during the regular season but not up for playoff basketball. I never trusted Peja in big games either. That could have been their year but I would still take a healthy Lakers over them. I was impressed with how they hanged with Minny tho, they played so awful when Webber was around I thought Minny would crush them for sure. It was maddening how they catered to Webber back then, if you're going to bring a piece like him in, it should be done from the bench in really limited minutes. Webber was just incredibly inefficient and he insisted on calling his own number all the time. Dude really wanted to win his way.

slashsnake
09-18-2015, 02:02 PM
Really good team in a really bad matchup that year. Sac was just doubling Shaq with Webber and Divac the entire game and he still got his 30 and 14, and a good defender but not quick enough Christie left completely alone on Kobe (or doubling down at times too) left him wide open to put up points as well. LA went really cold from downtown which made it a fun and closer series too.

Detroit showed the best way to try and take that LA team on (which Philly tried some but not enough O to keep up anyways). One on one shaq. He'll still get his even against the best defender. But you aren't opening your D to everyone else. Was the only team I really saw that forced LA to beat them all one on one. Usually it was dump it to Shaq and then play 4 on 3.

The Kings may have won a title if not for LA in the way, but you can say that a lot of the time for a lot of teams. Of course had the Lakers not made the post-season, the Kings would have been playing the Spurs instead in the WCF. So may have won a title, not would have for me.

In the end they had a good run for a few years, made a WCF Finals, and were the 3rd best western conference team of that era.

Where to rank them? Below all the champs, below some of the great teams that lost in the finals... Above the Nuggets a few years ago, or the Rockets this past year... I don't know. Does too low to bother with on an all time scale count?

JAZZNC
09-19-2015, 12:30 AM
Does too low to bother with on an all time scale count?

This. I have been reading this thread for a while and that one sentence really sums it up.

This "best team not to win a title" mess is absurd. There are a ton of teams I would consider equal to or better just since I've been watching.

adite34
09-20-2015, 08:58 AM
i agree

I agree too!