.....NBA superstar to actually carry his team all of the way? These days all contenders have at least two superstars to rely on. Not taking anything away from Shaq (or maybe I am), but having a Kobe Bryant and Glen Rice to back you up makes things a lot easier. Or is it? It doesn't seem too long ago that most teams had a franchise player and a bunch of role players. It was up to the coach to find everyone's strengths and maximize their potential. Take the 94 Rockets, for example. We had Hakeem who was at his peak and no one could stop him. No double-teams or triple-teams could stop him. He was the unstoppable force that our whole team philosophy was built around. Every other player on the team all played important roles but no one other than Dream was considered a star. No one else came close. Sam had tons of potential and tons of uncontrollable talent. Seven years later and he finally seems to have found a system or coach that keeps him under control. But even today Sam is not considered a superstar. Every team that makes it to or wins the Championship usually has more than one "superstar". Chicago - Jordan, Pippen (Pippen may be the one role player who acheived superstar status by association only) Lakers - Shaq, Kobe, Rice SanAn - Duncan, Robinson Portland - Pippen, Stoudamire, Wallace NY - Sprewell, Houston, Ewing Miami - Alonzo, Hardaway Phoenix - Hardaway, Kidd or Barkley, KJ Seattle - Payton, Kemp (Back when Seattle was good, damn good.) Indiana - Miller, Rose (granted, Rose isn't considered a star, but he will be if he keeps playing like he has. Miller definetly isn't carrying the team in every game. I'd have to say that Gary Payton comes the closest to being one of those guys who can just carry his team on his back. But even he couldn't beat the solid teamwork, fan support, flopping, and whining of the Jazz. Just another one of the many spectacular and amazing feats that the Dream managed to pull off. And this is also another thing to remember when some of you might be questioning why Hakeem deserves his $16 million next season. This is also an excellent reason why he deserves to go out with start treatment. Sometimes people with short attention spans need to be reminded just how dominant and spectacular he was. ------------------ RocketFuel is taking the summer off!
There are more "superstars" today. Bird had McHale, Parrish, and Bill Walton (He sucks but fits the current definition) Magic had other stars. OT was an All-star in 94? Isiah had the worm. I think too many people are considered superstars. ------------------ "You've got 6 fouls, use them well" -Derrick Coleman
Other than Payton you have to also look at Iverson in Philly. I like the idea though, most other championship teams had 2 stars (although I will never admit Pip is/was/ever will be at a super-star level). ------------------
The thing about having just one "superstar" like the Rockets had in 94 is that you not only need role players...but you need good role players. Hakeem didn't do it alone everynight...he always had help. One person on the team other than Dream would step up and be a "superstar" for that night. If Hakeem scored 30, OT would pour in 20...if Hakeem had 40, Horry would drop down 7 treys. That's how that team worked. They didn't have just one "superstar" every night. They had at least two every night, Hakeem and _______. Fill in the blank with whoever stepped up that night. Everyone always played their role, but whoever was hot that particular night was the second star. A lot of teams don't have players that are good enough to step up like that. They might have a bunch of role players, but many of those players aren't able to step up with 30 points on a given night. Horry, OT, Cassel, Maxwell, Smith, Elie...they all had the potential for a big game...many "role" players on other teams don't have that potential. Hakeem + Different "superstar" everynight = Championship. So in affect they did have that second superstar. It just was someone different every night. ------------------ You can't stop F&Brule, you can only hope to contain him.
I think some of you are missing my point. The question is: Given the way the league has evolved, do you think there is a current superstar that could carry a team of role players through the Finals? Will Hakeem be the last player (at least for a long time) to have done such a thing? Could Shaq lead a group of second-tier players to the Finals? Garnett can't do it. Webber can't do it. Payton can't do it, although sometimes it seems as if he could. Grant Hill can't do it. Of course Hakeem never did it alone, but everyone elses success had everything to do with Hakeem. That's why the role players occasionally had superstar games. All those guys had to do was follow the game plan and make their shots. Hakeem was the focus of every play. If he couldn't create for himself, he would creat opportunities for someone else. Someone would always be open. All they had to do was actually make their shots. And yes, OT was an All Star one year. You would have a hard time finding someone who actually knows who OT is much less finding someone who considered him a star. ------------------ RocketFuel is taking the summer off!
SpaceCity, You don't consider 20 pts and 10 rebs star quality? Because, that's just what OT did the year before he became a Rocket. No, I don't consider him a 'superstar', but I don't like when people dog my man OT. ------------------ I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.
Who's doggin OT?! I'm just saying that he wasn't considered a star player. The offense had little to do with OT. He got many of his points on rebounds and put-backs. (NOTE: that's not a bad thing. OT was definetly an inside presence.) He just wasn't a marquee player. ------------------ RocketFuel is taking the summer off!
I think last years' SA team is a pretty fair comparison. The Robinson of the last 2 years has been very analogous to what OT was for us in 94--both in terms of productivity and role for the team. TD was obviously the main man--Elliot and Robinson were the only two marginal stars on that team. Robinson was a superstar but he accepted a lessor role (or had too because he wasn't what he was 3 years ago). Avery, Elie and the rest of them were just regular ole role players. ------------------
Would you really consider David Robinson a superstar? I don't think he was any better than OT. BTW, you forgot entirely about Kevin Garnett... I think that gradual improvements could make the T-Wolves a one-man championship contenders with a collection of good roleplayers. BTW, Hakeem has been paid millions of dollars for playing basketball. He doesn't need 16m more. As pointed out in another thread, you don't pay anyone for past play, but expectation of future play. Any other way of looking at it is bad for business, and for competitiveness. We all like Hakeem... and he was a terrific player-completely dominated during those two years... I'm just getting sick of this defensive glorification of the man. ------------------
I think anyone who has been an MVP should be considered a superstar and that is what David Robinson is. David is one of the biggest superstars in the league. ------------------
Just for fun, here's an interesting stat. There was only one guy out of the 50 greatest who didn't have a teamate: Isaiah Thomas. Talk about individual effort. (and whoever mentioned Rodman as being his superstar sidekick, come on... Rodman was NOT a huge factor at that stage of his career...) But it's true, there isn't likely to be another megastar who can carry a team like to the championship again. Course, these days, the "star" label gets thrown away FAR too much. But whatever... Anyway, just my two cents... ------------------ "There are three kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and STATISTICS..." - Mark Twain -
haven, Two things: 1.) That is exactly what is wrong with the NBA. You should only pay a player for PAST performance, to an extent. Players like Garnett, Juwan Howard, Donyell Marshall, KELVIN FRIGGIN CATO, are all perfect examples of why a player shouldn't be payed for future production. 2.) The reason the T-Wolves can't win more is because they lack another star. When just about every other team in the league, and definitely every other contender has two stars, one star won't be able to cut it. ------------------ I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.
I think the answer to this question relies on whether or not you get the player of Hakeem's caliber on a team with the right role players. There are not very many players that were of the quality of Hakeem in the early and mid 90's. Yes, Shaq dominates the low post, but until he can diversify his play to get his teamates involved, and get the most out of every other player on the team, he won't be on the level that Hakeem was. Sure he can go drop in 40, but can he get 25 out of Horry or Fox? Its just a matter of time till you get a player of that caliber in the NBA again. Could Jordan have won without Pippen? I think so. He might not have won as many Championships, but he still would have had his fair share. I think you might see a player like Garnett win it. Hakeem wasn't the most dominating post player in history until well into his career when he was able to mature and take his game to another level. It might just be a matter of time before a player like Duncan or Garnett can mature to that same dominating level and take a team to the promised land on their shoulders. ------------------ You can't stop F&Brule, you can only hope to contain him.
To address the topic question exactly, you put just Shaq (no Kobe, no Rice) with the same type of players Hakeem played with (the role players), I say they would be the most dangerous team in the NBA right now with Portland close behind. Also, you take Robinson away from the '99 Spurs and plug in '94 OT, and the Spurs may have still won the title. Also, is it just me or is Miami trying to copy our '94 team a little bit with Mourning in the middle instead of Hakeem. They fail mainly because 'Zo ain't no Hakeem (though really, really, really, really good in his own right. just shows how great Hakeem was) and their guys can't hit the three like the Rox could. I'm not sure if they use the same DIT spacing offense. If they don't, they should, 'cuz I say that it's one of the MOST effective offenses despite its simplicity and unpopularity on this board. I posted the following in another thread before I stumbled upon this one, but feel it may fit just as well in this discussion. Hope it isn't against board etiquette if I post it again in this thread: I gotta ask you guys just how many guys in the league you would consider a "star" - it seems very subjective. I would assume we would all want a star who is not a guard, since that position looks so solid. So exactly how many frontcourt players out there fit the title "star" in y'all's opinion? How many come out each draft? DerMarr Johnson and Jerome Moiso may sound great as they enter the draft, but guys like that enter the draft every year. If they all panned out, this league would be littered with stars. Also, I don't know if just any frontcourt star would be a good fit with this team. Gary Payton + Vin Baker (he certainly looked like a legit star when they got him) isn't working out that great. Kenny Anderson + Derek Coleman (#1 pick, serious talent, serious #s) didn't light up the league. Van Exel + McDyess ain't getting the Nuggets anywhere, though they're young. There are better, more analogous examples out there that I just can't think of off the top of my head, but it just shows that out of the pool of "star" frontcourt players that are out there, there are even fewer that might really make this team great. Moreover, the availability of these stars is really small - young stars even more miniscule. I get the feeling that Philly was looking for their froncourt "star" to pair with Iverson when they were shopping Larry Hughes. They got Tony Kuckoc - frontcourt "star"???? I wonder if we couldn't get an out and out star, if we could get some talented players (maybe not stars in their own right) that would thrive in a system built around Francis and Mobley's penetration if this team couldn't take it to another level with a few years of continuity. The '94 Rockets did it, but then, Mr. Olajuwan was a VERY, VERY special player. I don't know if Francis is that special. ------------------
SpaceCity, good initial post. My answer to your question is NO. Oakdog you need to get some sleep. Shaq had role players in Orlando and we swept them. Robinson had decent PFs and Dream made him look silly. ------------------
Shaq also had Penny Hardaway in Orlando... ------------------ I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.
I like to think of it as Hakeem made those players better than they would have been otherwise. Only Cassell has come into his own since the Championships. It took him 6 years to get there, though. Mario won another title but his role was less than it was here. He started a fire under David and Tim's ass. he sank a few buzzer-beaters, but that was it. Kenny was smart and retired. OT faded into obscurity. Horry pumped up and lost his finesse, which took away from his overall game. Maxwell could have been a star in this league if it weren't for .... well, you know. If you think that these guys were on the verge of being all-stars then it was because of Hakeem. My whole point to this thread is to point out just how amazing Dream was at his peak. Some of you act like I'm dogging the rest of the crew. I'm not. Like i said, all those guys had to do was make shots and stick to the game plan. Oakdogg is right. No matter how much you people hated the old offense, there was no way for any team (except the Sonics) to stop it. It was never a question of whether to single or double team Dream. It was a question of whether to double or triple team him. Someone was always open. I haven't even mentioned defense yet. Other than Vernon, who on that team had great defense. We had great TEAM defense but only Dream and Vernon could just outright stop people. We were allowed to be risky with steal attempts because they always knew Dream was there to back them up. ------------------ RocketFuel is taking the summer off! [This message has been edited by SpaceCity (edited May 10, 2000).]
My only take on this is that Hakeem's role players where pretty damn good when compared to most role players. They were a step away from being All-Stars. Smith averaged like 15 ppg for his career. Maxwell averaged like 15 ppg and Thorpe had to be at like 17 ppg. Horry was the only player who had below average skills. Then you toss in Cassell. So while Houston only had one superstar, they also had a high number of high caliber players stepping onto the court. They were not your average role players if you ask me. They were much better. So when I look at the Rockets of 93-94 I look at them in the same light as the other championship teams. We were loaded. ------------------ humble, but hungry.
