[Sports Illustrated] Chris Ballard Piece on Daryl Morey - "Moneyballsy"

True, but you don't necessarily need the best player. Just one of the best. And if you do, the moneyball/Moreyball approch should be of great help to fill out the roster.

I'll pass. I just threw the top-5/top-10 thing out there. Maybe you do need a top-5 player, I don't know. I know in some years it's very much arguable whether or not the champs had a top-5 player on their team, but I'd rather go grab some lunch now than look into it.

 

Here's a list of NBA Finals Champions since 1947; someone who has a good memory of rosters go take a peek? (and/or someone who's willing to dig up rosters of each year)

 

Morey was apparently willing to go all in on P. Gasol and Nene, so when I hear the phrase "not picky", I get a little nauseous.

 

Dallas Mavericks 2 years ago ?

 

Dirk Nowitzki?

 

RV6,thanks,must have missed it out.
just a word is mentioning a preview from SI here

 

Fixed

 

No kidding! Dirk went to a different level during those playoffs. Series after series, he couldn't miss some of the most ridiculous shots.

He promptly fell back to earth with lingering injuries, but he was easily the best player in those playoffs.

 

Actually, IIRC he fell back to earth against the Heat. But then Terry got hot and picked up the slack. Kind of like Harden, who played extremely well up to the finals.

This may be a homer remark, but I think Harden can be that elite player. He has to improve to be sure. But at 23 there's plenty of room to improve. If he has another solid all-star player to play alongside of, I don't think it's a stretch that we can compete. And that's all you need to do. Heck, even the 90s Rockets needed luck to win... not talking about Chicago, but Seattle in both years.

 

I miss Hayes' and Shane's interviews, always so insightful

 

and he was the best player in nba!?!?

 

I'm guessing he is going to make a hail mary pass at CP3 (with Lin as the first guard off the bench).

 

this is what is called confirmation or retrospect bias...in retrospect whoever won of course he was the best player...hehehe...that only proves you don't need best players to win...imho the very term the best player is meaningless and relative...just a useful label that can be and is utterly misleading...

 

He could still shoot high arcing shots when needed. You just want him taking free throws and open jumpers with a better trajectory. You only rainbow when necessary.

 

2004 Pistons and 1978 SuperSonics are the obvious answers.

This year, the Spurs don't have a top 5 player, or maybe even a top 10 player, but hard to judge Ginobili or Parker on a scale like that.

 

I really miss Lowry and Dragic.

 

Best players is obviously relative. By definition alone it is relative.

Meaningless? In the sense that if a player is labeled best, sure they do not automatically win the championship. LeBron wore that mantle for a very long time before finally winning. It took teaming up with an allstar powerforward and sg before he was able to overcome the additional label of 'choker'.

These are simple labels and narratives driven by the media, but that still doesn't mean you do not need one of the best players to win a championship.

 

Dallas maveriks 2 years ago not only did not have the best player or 2 among the best...they didnt even have 1 of the best players...and they won it by beating and even sweeping teams with THE BEST and the teams with 1, 2 or 3 of the best players....mavs were all about TEAMBALL...and so should rockets...this is the beauty of basketball

 

The spurs are the best TEAM in basketball, a second would be the Grizzles.

 

The Mavericks had one player who was absolutely top 10, and arguably top
5, that season. The only player he faced in the playoffs who was clearly better than him was Lebron. Wade, Kobe, Durant, those are debatable.